Timeline for What are good adjectives that mean “not yet connected”?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 13, 2020 at 20:54 | answer | added | Anton | timeline score: 0 | |
| Oct 25, 2017 at 20:41 | history | protected | MetaEd | ||
| Jul 19, 2016 at 20:54 | vote | accept | Sean | ||
| Jul 3, 2016 at 17:56 | answer | added | alwayslearning | timeline score: 0 | |
| May 23, 2016 at 19:50 | comment | added | The Nate | De nada. (I put it as a comment because it is more a UIX than English approach.) | |
| May 23, 2016 at 12:53 | comment | added | The Nate | I suggested using connection exclusively for those that are connected and a completely different term for any potential or pending states. (possibly one of those) It's not an answer to your question as asked, but it would solve your problem as described. | |
| May 23, 2016 at 12:49 | comment | added | Sean | @TheNate As stated in the title of the question, the goal is to find a way to describe the state of being not yet connected, so "connections" doesn't help. | |
| May 21, 2016 at 8:53 | comment | added | The Nate | I'd drop the adjective entirely and give the connected state it's own unique term like "connections". Solves abiguity issues all over. | |
| May 21, 2016 at 4:11 | answer | added | killbot1984 | timeline score: 0 | |
| May 20, 2016 at 20:57 | comment | added | Sean | @JimMack Again, they've already been matched, so "pending matches" isn't appropriate. | |
| May 20, 2016 at 20:45 | comment | added | Jim Mack | Pending might work here as well. | |
| May 20, 2016 at 20:20 | answer | added | bib | timeline score: 1 | |
| May 20, 2016 at 20:07 | comment | added | Sean | @PellMel They've already been matched at this point, so "potential" and "prospective" don't feel appropriate. In truth, they are matches that are potential connections—but I want to find a way to convey that without using the word "connection". | |
| May 20, 2016 at 20:01 | comment | added | PellMel | How about potential matches? Or prospective matches? | |
| May 20, 2016 at 19:54 | review | First posts | |||
| May 20, 2016 at 22:51 | |||||
| May 20, 2016 at 19:47 | history | asked | Sean | CC BY-SA 3.0 |