[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in body (95): Translating natural language to logical proposition and infer a conclusion from two premises by adlofMerlin on math.SE

Another bountied fairly low quality question

Poor question?

I suggest to delete this (non-)question. Usually I prefer to close quickly, but wait for possible improvements before deleting a question. But there are exceptions :)

Practically PSQ.

@MartinR Gone.

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Link at beginning of answer, link at end of answer (95): One angle in a triangle is twice the other, find the relationship among the sides by user978702 on math.SE

@SmokeDetector The question itself seems a bit low-quality.

@user21820 Looks low-quality , closed as such.

@MartinR The undeletion vote is naughty. What a post !

@Peter Perhaps from the question author. Let's hope that nobody else follows. (I'm following the question now, not sure if that triggers a notification on undeletion.)

Did you also notice an answer with a comment "this link will hack your system" ? Deleted and marked as spam/abusive in the mean time.

@Peter: That was the recent report from the SmokeDetector.

@MartinR I wonder how many users fell into this trap and actually clicked on it despite the warning !

cv-pls solution-verification PSQ (and also almost certainly a duplicate). Does this root technically count as a solution to this radical equation?‭ - ShootinLemons‭ 2021-10-11 10:07:04Z

Isn't this a PSQ? OP asks why a certain relation is not an equivalence relation. They list the required conditions, but do not tell where/how they failed to check any of them.

@MartinR Given your reluctance to close other question with less context than this, I am surprised. Now you want to be picky about whether the context is the context you would have preferred?

@MartinR perhaps the asker deserved more time to improve their question?

@amWhy Why so aggressive? I cast several close and duplicate votes per day (as do you and many others here). If you have a concrete example where I should have close-voted, but did not, please let me know.

@amWhy As I said, I usually wait with delete votes. In this particular case, I got the impression from the already long discussion in the comments, that the question is unsalvageable.

@MartinR I do not think I've been aggressive; yes, we both do. No problem; but I think with respect to my first comment, I think it is you being a bit to aggressive or nit-picking. I suspect I know why. I have nothing more to say.

Side note : Is Jitendra Singh/Name around? The meta account "Name" doesn't exist anymore , their comment was here between mine and amWhy's. I sincerely hope that this user hasn't left.

@TeresaLisbon Yes, he has left. His account was deleted (at his request, I think).

@TeresaLisbon See the Mods office chat, @TeresaLisbon. And indeed it was at his request.

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted user (71): Prove that $x^{3m}+x^{3n+1}+x^{3p+2}$ is divisible by $x^2+x+1$ by LOLOL on math.SE

@amWhy @JoséCarlosSantos Thanks. I'm a bit shaken, honestly, but if it is, then we carry on and wish them well. I also think that low-rep users should try to find time to contribute mathematically, and perhaps being non-meta involved can help them be more involved in main site contributions.

Broad?

@TeresaLisbon Yes, it is.

@JoséCarlosSantos Thanks

@TeresaLisbon Too broad, me third.

@amWhy Thanks

Close

Close

Close

Close

Close

Close Isn't the comment a little interesting?

Note : The broad question above isn't going to be broad anymore (at least in my opinion) shortly.

@TeresaLisbon ??? I don't get it!

@amWhy Neither do I : but you might see that it's got an answer!

@amWhy Hausdorff-ness is a criteria while defining compactness especially in Euopean countries if i remember correctly and so this might make the answer variable place to place. Maybe this might be the meaning?

@JitendraSingh The answer makes a little more sense now, and I get the comment a little more. But yeah, this question is closed.

@JitendraSingh Thanks, the comment makes much more sense now!

Close Been lying in the queue for ages, picked off about (at least) 59 minutes too late!

Close

Close

@amWhy Why wouldn’t ... be an equivalence relation? Which condition (...) is not fulfilled? is a PSQ in my opinion. You may agree or not, but please do not make unsubstantiated claims about by “reluctance to close questions” or speculate about my motivations.

@TeresaLisbon That's a clear case for closure, in my book.

@MartinR And don't make unsubstantiated attributions like the one you assigned to me, in response to my concerns. You started with speculating and labeling; now you're the teapot calling the kettle black.

Hey, @Peter!

@TeresaLisbon So that means Jon Skeet is now working on Maths SE also wow (PS: In case you didn't understand the joke Jon Skeet is the higher rep user in SO and as per a joke here here he can answer a question even before it is asked and so that means he can close it also. Since it is closed for ages and asked just 1 hour before looks like Jon Skeet voted to close the question before even asked) ;)

@amWhy Hi, still nothing from Martin Hopf !

Oh, @Peter, I failed to catch that you were here, like usual.

@Peter Hmmm, that is puzzling, isn't it.

In fact, it is.

I have a nice C227 for him and hardmath

@Peter :( That's gotta be frustrating!

@JitendraSingh Actually, it hasn't been closed, despite a long run in the Close queue. Teresa/we are hoping to have the question closed.

@JitendraSingh But yes, I've heard many Jon Skeet jokes that are hilarious!

@MartinR Incredibly , this terrible post received a second undelete-vote !

@amWhy I asked this forum whether a certain question is a PSQ. To which you responded with “Given your reluctance to close other question with less context than this, I am surprised. Now you want to be picky about whether the context is the context you would have preferred?” – I find that aggressive and inappropriate, and that's why I responded. But I will refrain from discussion this further.

There is context there, just not what you think qualifies, @Martin R. So I do not see it as a PSQ, which you labeled it as. So now, if I question your comment(s), I am by definition, in your book, aggressive? Yikes.

@TeresaLisbon Ridicoulous reopen-vote.

@Peter @Teresa Needs to be deleted, it seems. One more downvote will open it for deletion.

Now two more downvotes, it seems shakes head

@amWhy The answer shows , by the way , how the 400k+ users got their rep ...

@Peter Exactly. This one never writes anything worthy, or more worthy, than other answers. It is only one more downvote needed. I saw another question that confused me.

@amWhy Do I express myself so badly? What I found aggressive is that you accuse me of being reluctant to close other questions, and that you speculated about my motivations.

Why did we have so few users here the last days ? Or did I just miss the proper timing ?

delete 1, 2

@JoséCarlosSantos Gone!

@MartinR Thank you.