"Oh ignore X, she's flaky"
Is it true that this term is essentially meaningless and X could as easily be a sappy NF cry-baby as an aspergers syndrome NT robot? A serial killer or buddhist monk? Her crime could have been to laugh at all your jokes creepily or spit in your face?
So after hearing it used to refer to behaviours and people so different as to make the term apparently meaningless, I asked a friend who uses it a lot, and he admitted he doesn't know what the term means either, but it's just that no-one will disagree with you if you use it to describe someone.
So how could such a travesty of language be allowed to happen? Is there a precedent for a "catch-all" descriptor? Where did this originate? Why? Has it been corrupted over time? Why "flaky"...? Soooo many questions. And finally: is there any common fucking denominator at all to it...?