whatever, quid

@ParamanandSingh Haha I'm trying to find funny anagrams for your name like ANAGRAM HANDPINS...

(anagram)

@XanderHenderson my favorite from my own: "Looks like Genghis Kahn and writes quizzes like him too"

Being cynical, I often wonder if this is done to reserve an answer slot on a question which is likely to be closed.

F'ck'n' pedantic mathematicians.

Done.

@Knight Also, not all folks fully bloom by 16, or 22 or even by 28. There's no age race to fulfilling one's potential.

QUID (a certain user of some sort of Q&A site; slang for British pound sterling)

That's.. too broad.. =P

If one needs British money to pay for a quidcake, is that quidquid?

My brain is doing weird stuff now.

@amWhy Congratulations on the 200k total rep !!🎉🎉🥳🥳

@quid I am very uncomfortable with the amount of influence that a certain account has been attempting to exert on the election. This account has been very active on meta, despite never asking nor answering a question on the main site. I am sure that you know which account I am referencing. Are the moderators planning on doing anything about this?

"I before E, except after C, and when sounded like 'A', as in 'neighbor' and 'weigh'."

@XanderHenderson QUITE RIGHT!

@Mini yes, but ban evasion is not right.

And then there's alliteration: "Let's let lowly losers lie low."

@Knight ,she knows what to do and moreover she didn't ask you

@quid No plans, specifically. We've been pretty hot and humid of late. Normally there'd be a lot of July 4th festivities in the US, but not so much this year, save for the wanna be homegrown fireworks technicians, which have been, and will be, randomly "booming" over the course of a week. It'll be all noise this year, no actual fireworks.

@amWhy, I got a gold medal today for which I shouldn't be talking about, but still, it's nice to have it :-)

@XanderHenderson @quid Please inform the moderator team that this meta question, which has been allowed to go extreme and offensive, needs a mods response. I think you selected the wrong users to 'take a break.' The post mirrors a frenzy on math.se that only the mods active in the last two to three years have partly allowed to happen, not intentionally, but as you must know by now, flags, like upvotes, aren't always of equal merit.

@Arjun An organization that is not concerned with doing what is right, only what makes the network more popular and hence, profitable.

What we could do is push locally for the reason being only used for the clarity part.

Any comment starting with "I don't want to be rude..." is likely to be quite rude.

IMO, the correct course of action is to leave in place the edits made by David E Speyer.

In fact, a recommendation to both you and to @Arjun: Hermann Hesse's Beneath the Wheel. It serves as a good reminder to not take oneself too seriously, too much of the time, particularly for scholars. Not that one should not aspire and work hard. But it surely addresses "the grind."

I think a pedagogical approach is to rationalize that this is where the ansatz-like approach must proceed carefully: If we define it as the integral and just leave at that, then it will not be a well-defined value. Now it depends on whether it is already intuitive that simply-connected domains allow for that or not. If it is, then things close up nicely. If it is not, I'd suggest to build that intuition beforehand, for example via Stokes' theorem ideas which the student are probably familiar w/.

@Arjun really? Sure he was a genius. But he died very young and did not really have a happy life it seems to me.

It's not just legal troubles, it's about the authenticity of the claims being made, @Qwid. At this point in time, false hope is worse than waiting for legitimate hope. False hope can cost peoples' lives.

Bingo, @Xander, the third of your guesses!

It's not that much time and energy

@quid Well it would have started much more nicely if every wanna-be editor who suggests poor edits didn't assume they know what's best on math.se. And if a certain frequent replier, particular to comments and posts critical of me of CURED would be warned to cut it out. But aside from that, all is good.

@Knight describing someone as "despotic" is far more offensive than describing someone as "ominous". I'm sorry you had your feelings hurt, but please stop taking every opportunity you have, on non-related sites, to complain about it.

Beyond the transparency it is also a question of self-awareness, if this is a good word. I do think it is alright, even desirable, that a new user does ask questions and they can also express their opinion. But it is still desirable and helpful if they are aware that maybe they miss some context.

And even it is not stiring up controversy the idea is that the site is shaped by its users, and not random folks that like to discuss on the internet.

...on a quid pro quo basis, e.g., in GENTLE?

The very point of the review queues is to focus attention and votes where they might be needed.

@RithikKapoor You also never answered my question: can you point to posts brought up in CURED which you genuinely think are of high quality---not just marginal "some people might vote the other way, but I can see why someone might vote to close this" quality, but actual high quality posts?

@RithikKapoor what you ask there is not a relevant question.

The entire debate is based on a false premise.

@RithikKapoor Only a tiny fraction of the site's membership participates in meta. Only a tiny fraction manages the review queue. How is this different?

That is precisely what is happening...

You would never see it. The existence of the room makes the process more transparent. It allows everyone to see what happens.

Well, personally I did not vote to delete. In any case, I do not see in which sense it is unethical to delete posts on Stack Exchange sites.

Be specific.

@BillDubuque You clearly are interested in arguing it, because you keep brining it up...