12:42 AM
Open for deletion: 1, 2, 3, 4,

12:54 AM
Close, and then...: 1, 2, 3, 4,
deletion 5,

1:17 AM

1:35 AM
@amWhy I think you over-edited... shouldn't the sequence $F$ have been left in?. (@everyone else: This is a PSQ, by the way.)

Oh, yikes... thanks for catching that: I wanted to use F to show in a comment to idk, and instead of copying, I may have cut it from the post. (see edit review). And I'm sorry, the question didn't deserve the edit I (originally) gave it
I have of course, voted accordingly.
@XanderHenderson You maybe should have rolled back to jacks original post! :)
(as I probably should have!)
@user21820 You're not going to believe this question. When the question was first asked, it was without the last "question." Then Carl Mummert commented below the post, asking for context, effort, and the OP posted the last question: Something to the effect "Can this be shown by using a truth table?"
@XanderHenderson I'm sorry, okay?

1:55 AM
Nothing to apologize for...

2:11 AM
and it is back: here

@XanderHenderson OMG!!

2:24 AM
@Xander Well, jack with a lowercase "j" has some pretty poor quality posts, which shouldn't be too surprising: here, and here, to start.

le sigh

2:47 AM
@XanderHenderson Yeah, I've got to turn to some light reading, play some music, before I head to bed because this has been a "sigh-ful" day.
Another user Jack Wonder whose posts need reviewing, after they posted a PSQ with directions of what he expected as an answer 4-5 hours ago , and I noticed a whole string of PSQ's asked by them.

4 hours later…
7:08 AM
@user170039 And, why didn't you vote to close, then? Right now, I'm the only close-voter...
@ProfessorVector Have you seen the batman question? If you haven't, perhaps refrain from clicking this link to it, unless you want to ask yourself what it's doing there.
=)

7:26 AM
@user21820 I've seen it, but those are the moments when I smile. :D

Hahaha. =) For me though, that particular no-effort post made me grumble.
(For just a bit, and then I went on to other things.)

8:02 AM
@Did @amWhy @ProfessorVector: Since I found the counter-example to this PSQ in my head in 1 minute with just basic arithmetic, I fail to see why the asker couldn't have found it on paper with minimal effort.
@SimplyBeautifulArt You mean like this "completely lost" PSQ?

3 hours later…
10:59 AM

3 hours later…
1:58 PM
@GabrielRomon The whole page is terrible... Reminds me of the cute exercise asking to show that every function $f:\mathbb R\to\mathbb R$ is such that $$\forall\epsilon>0\quad\exists\delta>0\quad\forall(x,y)\quad|x-y|<\delta\implie‌​s|f(x)-f(y)|<\epsilon$$ Right, every function...

user131753
2:21 PM
@Did I think you missed an "s" in \implies.

Open for deletion. (The OP had deleted this question, in order to reask it. The deletions were reversed, but the question remains un-improved by the OP.

@Did @amWhy: Doesn't make sense to keep this admitted wrong answer around.

2:37 PM
@user170039 ?? It seems I did not. Anyway.

@Did Oddly enough, there is an extra character between "implie" and "s".

@user21820 Hmmm... Very strange. Thus: $\forall\epsilon>0\quad\exists\delta>0\quad\forall(x,y)\quad|x-y|<\delta$ $\implies|f(x)-f(y)|<\epsilon$

@Did: For the sake of curiosity, I inspected the unicode of your "implies" and it was "implie%u200C%u200Bs", where "%u200C" is a zero-width non-joiner and "%u200B" is a zero-width space. Very strange indeed!

3 hours later…
5:26 PM
@user21820 Thanks for the "inspection". :-) No idea why these invisible characters pop up.

6:26 PM

7:15 PM
The history can be found by appending "/log" to the URL (but it was posted anonymously).

7:30 PM
CRUDE is hostile?

@XanderHenderson Oh I could suggest a few authors of that post! Ha ha!

I don't care who wrote it... I just don't grok it...
It seems that people have created some kind of boogey-man in their heads. :\
And now I have a Cranberries song running through my brain... :/

@XanderHenderson I don't care either. Likely a crank trying to spread some sort of conpiracy theory theory.

8:06 PM
@PeterMortensen Similar page, one day older. Stating as a fact that "experts" would be "leaving MSE" for this or that reason, with no evidence, was a rhetorical trick much used by BD, when not suspended yet, to support about any opinion they were trying to popularize.
@MartinSleziak Clear explanation, thanks.

8:46 PM
i'm sure people are quitting math.se if it doesn't feel rewarding and not because of some ppl being cranky in an obscure chat

8:59 PM
Well, Jaideep posted his "second? post"(I can't keep track)here, and I appreciate Asaf's comment below it.

2 hours later…
11:11 PM

PSQ, answered by one of the usual suspects.
Busy beavers are seeking to edit old posts, thus bumping old, low quality questions. Yay. :\
GAH! I am out of close votes!