@JyrkiLahtonen So... I like what you did. However, the OP has re-edited the question significantly since them.

They seem to have removed most of the context you provided.

I voted to reopen before, but now I wish that I could retract that vote. :\

@XanderHenderson Thanks for the update. So the claim was edited from somewhat non-trivially wrong to trivially wrong. Don't worry about it too much. The review task ended as leave closed. My interest on it went down after I realized that the original version was wrong for all odd order groups anyway. Meaning that Dietrich's example wasn't too special either.

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in answer, bad keyword with email in answer (171): Is Mega Millions Positive Expected Value? by Lerynne West on math.SE

close 1, 2, 3, 4

I don't think that this question is a bad question (quite the contrary---it seems borderline okay; there is some effort shown, though little context beyond that). However, I don't understand why it has 5 upvotes. It isn't that good.

I don't think that I am ever going to understand how this site works. :\

Someone didn't quite get the right impression of what we mean by "context".

I don't see a point in reopening this one. With the edit, it's still wrong, for even more stupid reasons (take k=g).

@darijgrinberg That question was discussed above (by @JyrkiLahtonen and myself). I am in agreement with you---it should not be reopened at this point.

Yeah, I've reverted the edits now but I think it can stay closed

wrong results aren't worth being open

This was mistakenly closed as a duplicate: math.stackexchange.com/questions/3115386/…