« first day (37 days earlier)      last day (1124 days later) » 

anorton
anorton
2:26 AM
I believe we can set "publication dates" for each blog entry, so it doesn't actually have to post exactly when approved. That way, the admins could approve articles as they are written, and then they appear at a scheduled time.
 
 
3 hours later…
mixedmath
mixedmath
5:02 AM
@anorton ah, you're right. Brilliant.
really, that makes things much easier. I never thought to look for such a feature
 
 
2 hours later…
Norbert
Norbert
7:18 AM
@mixedmath, @ArthurFischer, @anorton thank you!
 
 
12 hours later…
mixedmath
mixedmath
7:26 PM
@Norbert I've looked at and very minorly revised your post. I like it, and I wouldn't have found it without someone putting emphasis on it
well done
 
mixedmath
mixedmath
7:48 PM
I've also scheduled MJD's post to appear next week. See that the categories for preposts are "draft" (meaning they're partially written), "pending" (meaning they're ready for editing), and "scheduled" (meaning they're scheduled), which is sort of nice
@vzn: I'd like to chat briefly about your post. In short, we're going to ask you to rewrite it, and here's why. Firstly, blog posts will have morally proper spelling, punctuation, grammar, and capitalization.
Secondly, the post currently lacks a clear intent. I'm a bit uncertain if it was designed to be a link aggregator for your personal blog (which wouldn't be okay)
for example, you mention PvNP, automated provers, and the EDP - and all these links point back to your blog posts (which are also link aggregators)
if the intent is otherwise, it's a bit muddled
Here's something that I might recommend (just a recommendation!): scrap the SE stuff at the beginning, and design the post to highlight and inform intersections between computer science and mathematics.
Perhaps go into a bit of detail about recent progress on some of these questions. But absolutely link directly to the most useful and informative sites. For example, authoritative information on the EDP might be the polymath project dedicated to the EDP, or the Paper on the SAT approach itself
so when a user clicks on a link, they can be greeted with immediate and useful information, and understand why they clicked
finally, links can be given inline but still with footnote-style aggregation at the bottom in markdown. Let me find an example post with this.
(after a bit of random clicking on users who I know do this)
like in this answer by Bill: he uses markdown to both have links, but to give them all footnote-style at the end of the source
(click edit to see the markdown itself)
 
Américo Tavares
Américo Tavares
8:48 PM
@mixedmath please remove my two comments testing simple LaTeX in the post Hellow World! comment box. The code didn't render. I've used the format $latex [code]$.
 
anorton
anorton
@AméricoTavares Done.
 
Américo Tavares
Américo Tavares
@anorton Thanks. Do you know why the code didn't render?
 
anorton
anorton
@AméricoTavares I don't. What's really weird (to me, at least) is that the ChatJax bookmarklet I have for rendering mathjax didn't work for rendering it, either.
 
Américo Tavares
Américo Tavares
@anorton Someone has to try and solve the problem for the future.
 
vzn
vzn
9:18 PM
mm, so the axe falls. had a feeling it would happen.
sounds like too much of a hassle to me. too much of a rewrite. it all clashes/interferes with my personal style.
do not really like editorial committees, too many cooks in the kitchen :(
as for what you call link aggregation, in my words those are highly researched/diverse refs
not sure where your faceless editorial "we" comes from. who is we?
it is indeed intended to steer most further-interested viewers to my site, where there are other posts that have copious refs back to stackexchange....
the blog is basically what was volunteered and matches summary in the meta post.
there were no objections/pushback on that summary & presumed it would be ok.
am not interested in contributing to a blog that requires too much formality.
as the line says, hope this works out.
from your response, apparently speaking also for others who came to some consensus not-transparently outside this open forum/room, it seems not.
am not interested in serving at the arbitrary whims/tastes of self-appointed editors & working for their unpredictable approval.
dislike the se-wide resistance to refs to personal blogs eg of loyal stackexchange members. this shows up quite a bit in chat rooms, posts, and comments. its a real hassle at times and can get quite out of hand.
eg 30 day suspension on a site that shall remain nameless for a mere citation of my blog on a related topic to the post.
se policy equates refs to personal blogs with related topics as "spamming" which is much more reasonably interpreted as commercial advertising. it is vaguely blanket & can be arbitrary & capricious at times & left to the inconsistent whims of local mods.
also dont like that se mgt rarely—seemingly almost never—overrules questionable/borderline mod decisions, and mods almost never in my experience reverse editorial decisions based on meta feedback.
too many hoops to jump thru, esp for voluntary blogging. :(
however, cannot say this was an entirely unforeseen/unpredictable scenario.
as for capitalization, anorton said he fixed that. apparently not enough. whatever
 
Norbert
Norbert
9:44 PM
@vzn Every official blog must have certain editorial rules. I wouldn't be glad to read a blog written in such informal style as you usually do. This is not reddit, 9gag or 4chan.
 
vzn
vzn
fine! dont read it!
dont post it! you win!
 

« first day (37 days earlier)      last day (1124 days later) »