@amWhy Hi, amWhy. You linked to an answer, rather than the question itself. Any significance to that? What kind of close vote do you have in mind?

@hardmath I saw that! I meant to link to the question. I have not voted on the answer. I apologize for that confusion.

Let me correct for that: Please consider closing this. My second to last comment provides an incorrect link.

@amWhy Okay, thanks. I guess you want to close it as a bare PSQ? Some kind soul has supplemented the image link with a terse bit of MathJax.

@hardmath Yes... The "close reasons" have changed, but yes, I saw it as a bare PSQ. thanks for the update.

@user64742 Hey, Ducky!!

C/D: math.stackexchange.com/questions/3071765/… this site doesn’t accept questions about specific contest-like problems.

@user64742 The site accepts any good question - as it should. We are here to spread mathematical knowledge - not to hoard it.

@darijgrinberg Guess what? I already downvoted that post 5 years ago. We still need 3 more downvotes before it can be deleted. @amWhy @XanderHenderson @JoséCarlosSantos @RRL @BillDubuque

@amWhy Hello to you, too!

@user21820 Some good came from that post, namely "the perils of prowling on the outer limits of my knowledge" would be a great subtitle for Underwood Dudley's next book on crackpots. Sure beats "a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing".

@BillDubuque Hahahaha... Well, a good laugh I guess.

> Perils of Prowling on the Perimeter of Perception

Alliteration attracts attention.

@BillDubuque: By the way, you know that Dudley explicitly asks people to send him examples of crankery, right? (Which means, you can.)

Yet more gibberish which managed to greatly mislead the OP ("I am impressed by how much you know about numbers!") and at last one other user. @user21820 @darijgrinberg @JoséCarlosSantos @amWhy

@BillDubuque Ooh it's a self-verifying post: "I believe that ..."

@darijgrinberg That post is now up for deletion.

@user21820 Worth note: Arturo advised her that "nobody is going to have any idea what you are talking about" when she uses her idiosyncratic terminology but, alas, she continues to do so, e.g. here in a question on cyclotomic number fields that is also "prowling" beyond her "outer limits". This is one of the hallmarks of crankery.

@user21820 In fact I was browsing that website earlier today hoping it would help me make sense of some things (one can always hope...)

Heh I see.

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in answer, pattern-matching website in answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer (167): Ultra-metricity in sets by paulrodeur on math.SE

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in answer, pattern-matching website in answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer (167): Ultra-metricity in sets by paulrodeur on math.SE

@user21820 Reading posts like those makes one appreciate how much we take for granted the painstaking work of our mathematical forefathers in establishing a great universal language for mathematics - one that enables us to communicate efficiently and precisely. We learn this gradually - often by osmosis. Some of those dabbling in math seem to have completely missed out on such learning experiences.

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Pattern-matching website in answer (79): Why is gradient in the direction of ascent but not descent? by trissgold on math.SE

@BillDubuque It still needs one more downvote before we can start deleting it.

@BillDubuque is that why the site encourages me to post QA post pairs for problems I solve on my own even if I have no particular interest in putting them on the site in the first place?

I guess that makes sense.

Also the question isn’t even remotely math related. It is barely a dumbass attempt at tilting at windmills and seeing problems where they don’t exist. It is frankly embarrassing to have it exist.

cv-pls transformation PSQ How to transform a 3D model to a 2D image?‭ - Giordano Fearghas‭ 2018-05-04 20:12:37Z

del-pls transformation Missing context or other details (No Roomba: accepted answer) Composite transformation expresing as single transformation‭ - JackyBoi‭ 2012-10-17 04:03:00Z

del-pls transformation No Roomba Converting a function with support (0,1) to another function with support (0,infinity)‭ - S.A. Osagie‭ 2017-06-04 05:08:35Z

del-pls transformation No Roomba: accepted answer Finding the transform function of two histograms‭ - Ali‭ 2018-12-10 19:24:31Z

del-pls transformation No Roomba: accepted answer Coordinate transformation from unit ball to any ball‭ - math12‭ 2013-11-15 12:39:09Z

I have been working for the last month to either retag or delete every question which is tagged with only the tag tranformation; I don't think that this tag is at all useful (it was discussed in the tagging chatroom towards the end of last year). The above questions are the last ones---I think that they should all be deleted, but if anyone can come up with better tags, that would be good, too.

@XanderHenderson All gone now.

Non-question math.stackexchange.com/q/3527095/29335

D1, D2, D3.

D4, D5, D6.

D7, D8, D9.

D10, D11, D12.

D13, D14, D15.

C1, C2, C3.

C4, C5, C6.

C7, C8, C9.

C10, C11, C12.

@user21820 I'll come back to these (C1-C12) tomorrow, as I have no more close votes available until then. I made a good dent in the D's you posted prior.

VLQ WA picture answer

@BillDubuque Open for deletion now.

@amWhy Astonishingly, it got an upvote, so it can't be deleted just yet ... the mind boggles.

Btw, as an example of the ridiculous assumptions that some folks make, see this rant The actual context is as follows, while trying to convince a user that they were wrong about induction I vaguely recalled making the same critique on one of his prior answers so I did a SEDE query for "Have we met" to try to find it.

The query turned up the above thread (because he mentioned me in a comment), and I noticed that poor answer while there. I also noticed that my answer there could benefit by a link to a newer post, so I edited it. It is very sad that SE gamification has saome people so hooked on that drug that they can only imagine sinister intents for harmless constructive actions.

Need to re-delete the following: D(a), D(b)

Btw, speaking of said erroneous claim that an argument in non-inductive, if anyone has more patience than I it would be helpful to try to get that answer corrected. It is difficult enough as it is to properly teach induction without very-high-rep users misleading students with claims like that.

@user21820 Please see above (iirc you are sensitive to such logical pedagogical matters).

@BillDubuque Have you tell mods about it ?

@JoséCarlosSantos Thanks.

@Bellatrix It hasn't yet risen to the levels it has in the past ... but I'm keeping an eye on it.