Delta, as a mathematical operator, means either change in or difference to.
I personally don't think so. I've had a couple posts of mine liked that were relatively ancient, which were surprises to be sure, but not offensive in any way.
Personally I think it depends on the content of the response. For example, resurrecting an old thread in the Auto News section because new information about the vehicle in question came out? That's fine. Responding to a comment in a thread that's been dead for over a year with something small like "Lol awesome" or "I agree," while not against the rules, doesn't add anything actually new to the conversation, so it just seems like an unnecessary necro. At least, that's my 2 Lincolns on that topic.
I'm not looking to dredge anything up, particularly when I don't have anything meaningful to say that wasn't said in 2016. I was looking for an existing thread on pornography and found one about the morality (or lack thereof) of it, but that's not quite what I'm looking for.
Responding to old posts is fine, especially if they are questions. If I know the answer to something and see the original question left unanswered I get a pretty strong desire to reply just to prevent someone 10 years down the line searching for the same question to find a useless webpage.
I mean, getting likes is cool, just because it shows that people at least agree with you. I tend to give likes for posts I agree with, but don't have anything super-meaningful to add. I also feel like it tends to be pretty obvious when someone makes a post for the sake of getting likes, rather than create genuine content (which might be a byproduct of spending so much time on reddit).
It's me who should be apologising as it wasn't you but @TenEightyOne who complained via PM. Sorry for messing up.
I don't remember that at all, but then I'm a little impaired right now. My apologies if I was inappropriate.
There would have to be, but the difference becomes more and more negligible the further up the racing chain you get as drivers cut closer to the limits every time, and also the cars accelerate quicker so they reduce the amount of time not at full racing speed (obviously, straights being the place where drivers are hit the hardest).
Necro-liking is an art, a fine and subtle one. The crudest use would be to point out a prior contradiction in mid-argument; if you were already aware of that contradiction, it's fairly slick. If you go trawling for it, it's trashy.
Around the mid-80s. Naturally, at the time there was a lot of criticism that he was trying to make himself white (which wasn't helped by him also having operations to remove facial features typically associated with black people, although it left him with a ghoulish appearance that I wouldn't consider typically white, either) but at the time most of the public weren't aware of the extent of the various health issues he had, and as this was all for show, in private when he wasn't wearing layers of makeup and skin-lightening cream, his skin tone probably would've been much darker, but patchy and uneven.
I'm going out on a limb here, but I think some circles of Black America were Not Happy that a performer was changing their visual appearance to be more "homogenized". But on the other hand, I think he got a deservedly free pass from most mainstream media, compared to other artists because he was easily one of the most famous people in the world, having been Black and Successful way before he'd changed his appearance.
