CURED

@TheGreatDuck Do you have a question about whether this question should be closed or reopened or undelted, or deleted, or edited? Now, currently? I mean, since this is CRUDE, I'm assuming you've posted your question in order to ask folks to CRUD or E?

I guess that CONTEXT matters when considering how to provide proper CONTEXT

The question is "Why do we use different symbols", which is clear all by itself; context for the question is "Hey, third graders use $\times$ while grown ups use $\cdot$ (or nothing at all)."

@DavidReed I thought you must have replied to that version, because it would not have been a good answer, otherwise. Obviously, the OP changed it to make their (erroneous) thought more explicit: we can't have x^{1/\infty}=1, because that would imply x=1^\infty. That's a fallacy, but it's no doubt a mathematical fallacy. And that's why I'm not sure deleting is such a good idea: people should be warned of those fallacies. Ok, there are lots of those warnings, already, so it would be acceptable.

@user21820 LOL! That guy posted all of his homework. A clear case where we quite obviously agree.

@Did @ZacharySelk @amWhy @XanderHenderson @SimplyBeautifulArt: PSQs here and here and here and here.

@ProfessorVector Which ends is the question "Btw, you aren't considering changing your user name to Darth Maul, are you?" achieving?

@ProfessorVector If it was a joke, I would let it pass, but for the sake of not re-igniting the recent fire, please refrain from making such remarks, as they do nothing to contribute anything constructive.

It's off-topic to this room, and contains a hidden implication, and you know what I mean...

@user21820 ... Rather, one could argue that MSE was never meant to serve as a notepad for other fora. 2. Later on, replace " your that post was in response" by " your post was in response".

@XanderHenderson And yet I believe this is true too! Questions by motivated people arising from curiosity are nearly always quite different in form and content from questions by lazy people.

Please keep an eye on this (currently deleted answer) which has been closed, deleted, undeleted, deleted, undeleted, deleted .... Five users have been involved in its three deletions, including me on two of them. Four users have been involved in its undeletions, one of which is an answerer who stands to lose 82 points from it's deletion, who participated in each undeletion.

@DavidReed Indeed, that would be a more appropriate forum for those questions, as (near as I can figure) MSE is not meant to be a "Help me with my homework" site.

@MichaelHardy That is a nice self portrait of yourself. You are a man who demands conformance to your ways.

your first move was to cast aspersions at those who disagreed with you

@MichaelHardy I spoke to you and explained my position long before your message about the same ole question appeared today, and long before I stated I will not engage any further with you on this matter. You blew it. I spoke, you didn't want to hear it, denied it, pretended, played the role of a drama queen. I'm done.

@MichaelHardy What you don't seem to grok is that people are legitimately offended by your assumption that the only justification for a downvote or close vote is irrational. People of good will can disagree without name-calling.

Good day, @MichaelHardy. As I said, when you're ready, and willing, and receptive, to engagement, to find areas that we may agree upon, and those that perhaps, not so much, and respect that just as you feel principled and maintain that posture, others (like me) are also principled, just as much you think you are, there can be no discussion. Period. Cheers!

@MichaelHardy Why don't you explain why, after answering or upvoting so hastily, a post, that you didn't even realize what you were upvoting, or reopening.

Then you haven't been reading, listening, or willing to acknowledge that there are those that think your rants were wrong, that the closing was corrrect, and obviously correct.

I am tempted to vote to reopen just so that it can be closed as a dupe

it is inflammatory language when a simple "Hey, I don't think that this question should have been closed" or even "How the heck did this get downvoted?" would have been just as good, without casting aspersions.

@MartinSleziak Possibly---I have trouble parsing all of the timestamps. At any rate, I don't see the necessity in declaring that every downvote or vtc is "irrational"

Let me just say that I appreciate the effort you put into improving the question. Hardly anybody could object to closing the question in its original form.

I mean, do as you like, but flies, honey, vinegar, and all that...

Similarly as there can be questions with missing context, the same is true about chat messages.

Could you at least specify what you mean by "that particular question"? Do you mean: Variance of a sum of correlated random variables. The final line of the work is right but it does not make sense to me?

Well, you shouldn't have cursed them out in another thread, but that is neither here nor there with respect to them commenting on an old post of yours.

Is it possible to delete the answers by Graubner with the worse scores ? see math.stackexchange.com/users/175066/…

This is also relevant.

@Typhon Well, I just edited again. I think one could reasonably see the attempts of the asker to edit as good faith attempt(s) to improve the question. So perhaps it isn't the best to assume ill intentions by the asker, here. The consequences of bullying a non-cheater are worse than missing a cheater, as I see it.

@Typhon It seems that you might want to read the Be Nice policy. George's question may be an attempt to cheat, but it is also possible that George is self-studying, or that they have confusion about something that is related to some class that they are taking.

The accusation that they are cheating is uncalled for.

15 edits is ridiculous

@user21820, @SimplyBeautifulArt, @Did, @ZacharySelk Keep an eye out for this user who seems to post nothing but PSQs. See the two question posted thus far today, e.g.

This room is now six years old. I'd guess it was more active during the last year than ever before.

@amWhy : What do you take to be the scope of CRUDE? The description says it's for discussion of Close/Reopen/Undelete/Delete/Edit for questions and answers on Math SE.

@John No, the activity page on Meta Math, particularly the questions (though you likely won't be able to see all the many, many deleted questions.) No matter. But do read this post, and please add to the commenter that they are likely reading too much in to the situation, like you told me, (as well as deleting my comment which was tit for tat. You don't seem terribly adept at, or familiar with this site.

@Michael Please create another chatroom to discuss topics outside the scope of CRUDE.

@MichaelHardy The reason is rather elementary, my dear Michael Hardy. Had you asked for it, instead of offending me and other users, you'd have been more productive. I shall waste no further time on you, at this point. Good day

@amWhy I can't tell if this is supposed to be funny, or a genuine denial of what you just said. I'm going to go with funny.

@amWhy : A reason that is not expressed in the words of the person who acts is immediately suspect.

@John I don't know what you are talking about.

@MichaelHardy Hardly. It's an objectively true statement. Whether you think the reasons are good is another matter, but closing does require a reason.

@MichaelHardy Closing a question requires the close-voters to specify a reason. That reason would have been displayed when the question is closed.

@John No, it is an extenuating and not very constructive rehashing of debates already held thousand times.

@MichaelHardy those are distinct issues. Closing can be done without disrespecting new users; if you see the latter going on, flag it.

This was not a "problem statement question". It explained exactly which part of the solution the poster did not understand.

@John Actually, PSQ = Problem Statement Question.

@MichaelHardy You are twisting things, again. I have and had no objection to discussing this matter with you, were it not for your initial post: "an the reasons why some people voted to close this be explained in such a way that a person possessing considerable ordinary common sense can understand it? My first reaction is to think that those voting to close it are dishonest and malicious." Please know, that if you are actually sincere in understanding the votes, you'd be more productive by