@SmokeDetector That answer is deleted (spam/offensive) now, but I fail to see why: The question asks for a book recommendation, and that's what the answer is.
Same for this answer: Why is that spam/rude/abusive?
@user170039 No official statements. Why would anybody post something like that? This is just chatting with colleagues. Many other users (including present moderators) have given similar accounts.
@BillDubuque "What truly matters is not one random opinion but rather how the site ends up being used,..." Concentrating on the last part of that quote. The problem is exactly that several groups of users want to use the site in different ways. I ran for a moderator position because at that time I still felt that adults can talk this over, and agree to a compromise that eliminates extremal opinions.
What I will fight tooth and nail is that we have a few users who completely ignore how others want the site to be used. I resigned because I didn't think my original campaign gave me a license to enforce a compromise, but that's water under the bridge.
For example, we have a few high rep users who freely answer homework duplicates in Math.SE. But, the same individuals will instantly close to vote as dupes similar minor variants at Tex.SE. Double standards like that give me pimples.
2
But, I do confess that low level duplicates are IMO the worst. The gamification aspects already distort the voting in favor of lower level content. Duplication and lack of discipline exacerbates the problem.
In any case, I decided not to flag. (Although it can see suspicious, it did not seem as a clear-cut case to me. I did not check whether there were other posts detected by SD containing the same domain.)
@MartinR In that case, I think part of the problem was that the same user was posting several answers that only repeated the content of the same website. I've collected a few examples that came up as review audits here.
There's also a link to an answer I've posted in the Reopen thread to defend one of these answers (maybe even the one you've asked about). It's from the comments there that I realised there was a pattern.
The new answer today fits that pattern, so I've flagged it as spam because I found it suspicious.
I did not know that “OnlineBooksReview” website, but it does not seem suspicious to me if book recommendations link to that site. But I may be wrong of course.
@JyrkiLahtonen Your claim that "low level dupes are the worst" is yet another example of your bias against lower-level questions. We should not be biased against beginners. In fact they need more help than advanced students so some of the things you propose are exactly the opposite of what is best pedagogically. I understand that you are extremely frustrated with various side-effects of gamification, and these are exacerbated at lower levels. But don't flush the baby with the bath water.
@BillDubuque Bias or not, I'm not gonna argue that. But the site is based on us forcing to play the rep game. It is then not unnatural to ask for a level playing field. For the purposes of the rep game the elementary questions play a role not unlike Bernie Madoff's pyramid scheme in the running of the StockExchange (one letter difference). Ask some, answer some, invite more friends, etc. The US courts sent Madoff behind bars.
@JyrkiLahtonen Sorry to hear that you believe that you are "forced to play the rep game". That explains to some extent many of your frustrations. Try to ignore those puerile numbers and you'll probably find the site more pleasant.
@JyrkiLahtonen It seems that our difference of opinions have to do with the relative importance of teaching / exposition vs. fair gaming. I would never compromise the former merely to prevent some users from abusing gamification. I'm here primarily to share beautiful mathematical knowledge, not to play pueriie games. And you?
I find the baby and the bathwater comparison a broken reed, when the same baby has been bathed by several people already. Today even.
Oh, the point is that there are 40 calculus questions, quite a few more in class field theory. Yet that does not show on this site because it is heavily biased against more advanced math. Mind you, the fact Matt Emerton does not have 100 times my upvote count in class field theory is a disgrace.
But, I need to leave the site to unwind. Sorry, if this exchange ruined your day.
@JyrkiLahtonen But I don't think that we disagree on dupe closure / deletion. Rather, I disagree that it is ok to use lower-quality dupe targets for dupes at lower levels because you are so frustrated that you don't want to spend the time to find quality targets. That is not fair to those at lower levels.
@JyrkiLahtonen Still i don't understand your point. Why should it be surprising that an esoteric advanced (though beautiful) field like class-field-theory is little represented here vs. calculus. That is surely true in every general-level mathematical community
user131753
2:56 PM
@JyrkiLahtonen In that case, I am not really sure how much those statements need to be taken into serious consideration because I can imagine someone else arguing just the opposite thing in a similar way.
user131753
Also just to be precise, we were discussing about people "of note" whom we "lost" (probably primarily) "due to the site gaining a reputation as a homework mill". The users (unless they are not among those people whom we "lost" already) and "present moderators" doesn't really fit into this context simply because if the moderators are really "present" now how can they be among those persons whom we have "lost"?
@user170039 May be I did not communicate clearly. Some colleagues have told me that they are not interested in MSE because of this reputation in spite of my pleas. One of the present moderators told similar stories. Even though both him and myself continue to fight for a site dedicated to math at ALL levels instead of just low and popular levels.
@BillDubuque That the amount of rep available in different tags varies does not bother me. But the scale of the difference is harder to accept. Admittedly I did pick an extremal case to make a point.
@user170039 In other words "similar accounts" referred to failed attempts to convince colleagues to give Math.SE a try as the said colleagues refused to consider helping a homework mill.
@BillDubuque If you say that you never compromise this one thing for the common good, then your opposite numbers will never compromise their conditions either. I will never compromise on the dupes. I know that this is not like in the academia, but at the level of my instincts dupe answering is not that far from plagiarism. Certain answerers display lack of basic intellectual honesty by not searching.
@JyrkiLahtonen Please be more precise. Do you mean to imply that I should compromise my teaching principles because "Certain answerers display lack of basic intellectual honesty by not searching."?
@JyrkiLahtonen Again, we seem to agree on many of the serious problems posed by rampant duplication. Rather we disagree mainly on what is a fair way to solve it. You seem not to mind if the solution might negatively impact lower-level expositions. But I care deeply since I think that expositions at lower-levels is one of the most - if not the most - important contribution this site makes to the (mathematical) world.
@BillDubuque That is actually a reasonable summary. Another point of disagreement may be that I don't see how stopping duplication altogether hampers your chances of lower-level exposition.
