reopen After reading Andrej Bauer's comments, I would be glad to see this question reopened: Base having open compact members. (I agree that the formulation of the question is far from optimal, but it seems that this class of spaces is actually useful.)
Probably this boils down again to: "Is it worth keeping the question for the sake of answers?" As mentioned in the past, there are different opinions on this. But this room seems like a reasonable place to try before posting to reopen request thread.
I have also asked Andrej Bauer whether he could improve the question bit. (If you look at the comments, he mentioned that he would like to see the question reopened so that he can post an answer.)
@AndrejBauer Perhaps if you could edit the question to add a few words explaining why the question can be considered interesting, that might improve the chance of getting reopened. I have tried to find some support for reopening the post also elsewhere - we will see how this turns out in the end. (Needless to say, I am not that surprised that question containing two sentences with no motivation at all got closed.) — Martin Sleziak57 secs ago
I have added at least one sentence mentioning a class of such spaces. (I guess that probably is not enough to consider this sufficient context.)
@MartinSleziak Isn't the obvious solution to be for you or Andrej to post a new good question (as example to others) and to leave the old question closed (instead of rewarding the poster)? If you post it, you can then pass the link to Andrej to answer it. As I see it, improving bad questions just to keep the answers is contrary to the notion of wanting good quality questions on Math SE, because people will be emboldened to post lousy questions because the net result is positive reputation gain.
@user21820 Not much to add. We have talked about this a few times before and, as said in our past discussion, I see it differently. (BTW as a result of my past discussion about similar situation - when I reposted the question to add more context, I got some downvotes. Not that I am in danger of question ban, but at least it's worth trying this way first.)
The solution you suggest would also need help from mods to move current answers.
Anyway, it seems that the question has been reopened, so the discussion seem to be a bit moot - at least in this instance.
@MartinSleziak Can you give me an example where you reposted it? I can't quite see why people (even of my type) should downvote a question that you think has more context.
@user21820 Of course, it might have been a coincidence. But as you can see on the timeline, I got a downvote on a repost relatively shortly after I mentioned it in this room.
Of course, it is normal that people have different opinion, so I can live with a few downvotes - whether they were cast to express view on the quality of the question or whether they were cast as a sign of disagreement with the way I handled that situation.
@MartinSleziak I'm 99% sure it's not because you mentioned in this room, but because your first comment under the question just 1 min after posting it was to draw attention to the fact that it was a repost of a bad question that had a delete/undelete war... lol...
Incidentally, 7 upvotes is already very good. I don't think the average score of my questions is even 3, despite me putting much more effort into each of them...
Okay maybe it's more than 3, but certainly less than 5.
@user21820 As I said, it might have been a coincidence. But considering the fact that it was on the same day as the discussion here in chat, 99% seems a bit too high to me. (Of course, the other downvote was well before that discussion, so the other one definitely does not have anything to do with it.)
I think you didn't get my point. You posted the following comment only one minute after the question:
The reason for posting this was the delete-undelete war on this post. (See also meta.) This also means that I know the answer - I have seen it on the deleted post. The repeated deletion and undeletion suggests that some users consider this question useful and some do not. I hope that this version of the question has the better form than the original one. Perhaps in this way everybody is satisfied. — Martin SleziakSep 2 '16 at 21:32
But I brought it up not to complain about downvote - but the downvote can be seen that some users do not like this approach (of reposting with more context). And this is independent on whether they learned about reposting from comments on the question, or from meta - this was mentioned in the reopen request thread, or from this room.
@user21820 I agree with that. But the timing suggests that attention of one of the downvoter might have been brought to the delete/undelete war from this room. (By that I mean that the downvote and the mention of this here in chat were on the same day. At the same time, the question was bumped on the same day, so they might be completely unrelated.)
But again, the question was very likely bumped as a result of discussion in this room - since the editor is regular user of this room.
Anyway, the question is reopened, now it's Andrej Bauer's move. Probably after he posts an answer, the comments can be a bit cleaned up on that question.
@amWhy @Did @Jack @SimplyBeautifulArt @Xam @LeakyNun @MartinSleziak: Please help! This and this are utter rubbish. We're going to need all the downvotes we can throw at them to be able to delete them.
@user21820, @SimplyBeautifulArt, @Did, @Jack, @all. Does anyone agree with me that the Do-four-proofs-for me needs to be closed? "Off topic" is valid reasonable, as is "too broad".
This question is a "find the sum for me" question. A problem statement requiring both the title and the appeal for "help" (rather "do it for me")
I'm really getting perturbed by PSQ askers using something to the effect: "Help me do the following", "Help me prove ...", "Help me solve ...". Maybe asking for "help" is simply a way around saying "Do the following," "Prove the following for me" etc.
"On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog" is an adage about Internet anonymity which began as a cartoon caption by Peter Steiner and published by The New Yorker on July 5, 1993. The cartoon features two dogs: one sitting on a chair in front of a computer, speaking the caption to a second dog sitting on the floor listening to the first. As of 2011, the panel was the most reproduced cartoon from The New Yorker, and Steiner has earned over US$50,000 from its reprinting.
== History ==
Peter Steiner, a cartoonist and contributor to The New Yorker since 1979, said the cartoon initially did not get...
This is firstly not an answer (due to low rep not being able to comment), but secondly is mathematically wrong as pointed out in a comment, so worth deleting.
@SimplyBeautifulArt Oh, so you think that some given amount of obvious crap posted to the site, causes an answer ban? Graubner's farce, which goes on for ages now and is countered only by a few users with no high powered mod tools, not by any mod action that I would be aware of, seems to show that this amount, if it exists at all, is fixed so high as to be useless.
@SimplyBeautifulArt Seriously, my impression is that no SE site except math.SE allows this. The reasons why our mods refuse to act escape me. I asked several times but no answer ever came, except the ritual reminders of the (inadequate) (well-known) tools at the disposal of us mere users. Pah...
@SimplyBeautifulArt Yeah, your daily vote count replenishes the votes you cast prior to deletion in any given day, and no matter when, if you downvote an answer (and lose -1), when that answer is deleted, it credits you back that vote.
@SmokeDetector Rolled back, Smokey.... Thanks; it was an attempt by said asker to obliterate their post. Rolled back. The question does deserve a valid closure, though math.stackexchange.com/questions/2453393/…
@SimplyBeautifulArt DV and CV... more CV's needed.