[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Repeating characters in body: How do I used triple integrals to calculate the volume of this solid? by hahaxdlolll on math.SE

@amWhy It is actually really interesting watching her move through Piaget's theory. And yes, her conflation of "mistake" and "lie" are totally appropriate for a six year old.

Dang... That answer is useless...

I'm not sure that the question to which it is attached is much better, but it's pretty old, so maybe it doesn't matter?

@XanderHenderson I like that one. :P It's a question I imagine a lot of budding analysts having, and judging from the viewcount, many have searched for such a question/answer before. Personally, I think Vlad's answer deserves more credit. :D

@XanderHenderson There are quite a few reasonable questions on this site where someone asks "does this thing exist?" and the answer is "no", and there's nothing really else to say about it. A lot of these questions go unanswered because no one has anything else good to say. So I think there is some merit in creating an answer that just says "No, there is no such thing" (and probably marking that answer community wiki), just so users can vote on that "no" answer.

The OP can be informed democratically that the answer to their question is no.

@MikePierce A simple "no" is very different from a condescending "No. I do hope this allows you to stop wondering about this."

Also, the viewcount is very easily explained: the question has a kind of "clickbaity" title, making it very easy to get on the HNQ

at that point, loads of people who wouldn't normally bother to even ask a question about mathematics show up, and artificially inflate both the viewcount, and the number of upvotes

(since the bar for upvoting is lower than the bar for downvoting, and most people are far less likely to downvote)

Looking at revisions 2 and revision 3, maybe some users complained about answer being too aggressive/demeaning.

Some of the comments might have been deleted by now.

indeed, though the ranty revision was only there for three hours.

I figured it was once a HNQ, but nearly 10k views seems too high for just being influenced by HNQ views.

In any event, most of the answer are "No, but why not try this?" vs that particular answer, which is "No. Don't be an ass."

Wow, what an revision history! Yeah, I just took the poor wording of that answer to be ... poor wording, not condescending.

Also, 10k views does not seem unreasonable for an HNQ question

This thing is less than a day old and already over 1.5k

Yeah, but don't HNQs usually stay there for only a day or two?

It depends; the ones with really clickbaity titles can stick around for a long time

Not, math, but this question has been on the HNQ for a week

and has 15k views

Yeah, but that question is cool. :P Hold on a sec while I go get 25K reputation so we can check the site analytics. :D

ha!

Woah... what happened here?

-13k XP in two days!? I don't even have that much XP to lose :\

right... bedtime

BECAUSE IT IS LATE

@XanderHenderson You probably noticed but there is a post on meta about this: User deletion causes 13,000 point reputation loss?.

Why was this question put on hold with no comments to the OP? math.stackexchange.com/q/2740623/269624

It's deleted by the OP now, probably because I scared them with my comment, but still. I think the question is perfectly valid

There was quite enough context in it

@YuriyS Looks like a fine question to me. I undeleted and reopened it.

@MartinSleziak I waited a bit to see whether I get some response. Eventually I voted to close 475824 as a duplicate of 2727358. (The newer question has more answer, possibly it might be more useful.) We will see whether the voter in the review will agree with the assessment.

I did not touch 1820622 which can be considered as solution verification.

If they are closed, I am not sure whether there is need to merge them. And the answersto the deleted question 432514: Derivative of $x\sqrt{1+y}+y\sqrt{1+x}=0$ is probably not of such a great quality that it would require being moved/merged to some of the questions that are not deleted.

@YuriyS @DanielFischer I see nothing wrong with the question, but have edited the title so that it no longer reads "Haw to approximate this integral?" (which is likely a work around for the fact that this is another question titled "How to approximate this integral?")

@XanderHenderson Didn't notice that. Brain's auto-correction turned up too high. Thanks.

Heh.

Here's one

@amWhy Okay sure. I find it tiring too. If only there was an easier way. Even this star-board method was a 'life-hack', since certainly we don't treat these PSQs as "interesting". =)

@amWhy Gone!

@user21820 I just unpinned it!! Just saw so myself!

@amWhy Only 10 left, which we'd have to wait for.

PSQ. Another, and another

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Mostly non-Latin answer: Finding a "backward orthogonalization" in $\ell_2$ by VadimG on math.SE

I'm not sure what to think of this question. Pages of handwritten notes...

First post. Closed by users. Deleted by asker. Second post.

@XanderHenderson The only contextualization for the question, per se, that the images provide are for where it arose from. Thus, I am editing the images out and changing them to "I've found this equation while solving a problem related to a triple pendulum (for context, w is the frequency of a triple pendulum with equal lengths l; and g is gravity) and couldn't manage to proceed." I think that plethora of images may be bad for mobile users (it is uncomfortable for display in desktop).

If anyone thinks that is unwarranted, please reverse the edit.

(I did not make this explicit, but the "work (...) so far" on the images don't seem to be work towards the problem as stated on MSE, so I don't see their point on the question)

Besides contextualization of where the problem arises, of course, which is what I intended to convey on the edit.