Martin Sleziak's room

« first day (681 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2749 days later) »

3:21 AM

Hat off to your internet searching abilities. (I suppose the paer in question is Baker, I.N., Rippon, P.J.: Convergence of infinite exponentials. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. 8, 179–186 (1983) which I was not able to find. And +1 with very thorough answer. — Martin Sleziak 30 mins ago

I slightly disagree with: "there is little incentive to answer advanced questions". I think that many other users share similar viewpoint: I would rather spend the same amount of time going through the paper about which somebody asks a question than answering somewhat trivial precalculus question. (Assuming the paper is from the area I am interested in and at difficulty level I am able to understand.) The difference is that it is not very likely that I stumble upon a question about a paper from area close to my interests simply because questions asking about clarification of some part... — Martin Sleziak 26 mins ago

...of a paper are minority on this site. (Not to give false impression, I am guilty of occasionally picking lhf. And I understand that there are some psychological effect in play, such as instant gratification and gamification. But still I would hope that the main factors that make me answer a question are possibility to help other users and my own interst in the topic - rather then reputation.) — Martin Sleziak 23 mins ago

There are various ways I browse math.SE, often I look at recently active questions (especially when I feel like retagging or improving the post).

But often I look at the questions returned by searching for intags:mine is:q (and sorted by recent activity).

It never occurred to me that simply adding the word doi might result in giving sample of some more advance posts. (Simply because this means that some paper has been mentioned there.)

1 hour later…

Martin Sleziak

4:27 AM

As suggested in an answer to the meta post you made about this question, it would be nice to give a link to the article. If it is not available, at least to give precise reference. Is this about the paper Baker, I.N., Rippon, P.J.: Convergence of infinite exponentials. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. 8, 179–186 (1983)? — Martin Sleziak 1 hour ago

@MartinSleziak Yes it is. To my knowledge the article is available from ResearchGate and from tandfonline. — cpiegore 56 mins ago

@MartinSleziak I'm sorry but you stirred up some bad memories: tandfonline wanted me to pay $50 for the article, and ResearchGate made me go through some other rigmarole. — cpiegore 15 mins ago

@MartinSleziak I'd much rather give a link to something that doesn't ask a ton of questions or charge money, but I don't know of any. — cpiegore 13 mins ago

Since in the comments we veered away from the topic of the question, perhaps it would be better to continue the discussion (if needed) in chat: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/19138/2016/10/15 — Martin Sleziak 6 secs ago

Re: tandfonline wanted me to pay for the article, and ResearchGate made me go through some other rigmarole.

I think this is besides the point. If the article is behind the paywall, some universities have access to them, so some of the users might be able to download the paper.

Similarly, if it is on RG or academia.edu, users who are registered there might be able to download the paper.

Even if only some users will be able to access the paper, the link is still useful.

And, moreover, without giving precise reference, you make it more difficult for readers of your post to find the paper.

Re: I'd much rather give a link to something that doesn't ask a ton of questions or charge money, but I don't know of any.

So I guess the link I have added to your post is of this kind, right?

Anyway, the reason for my comments (and also the reason that I am bit annoyed) is that: 1) You have asked on meta about your question. 2) You got a very good advice about how to improve your question. 3) You ignored the advice and did nothing with the question. (You left for other users to find precise reference, doi link - these are things which should ideally be done by the OP.)

Martin Sleziak

4:41 AM

Let us continue this discussion in chat. — cpiegore 49 secs ago

Martin Sleziak

5:12 AM

The discussion continued here: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/46845