« first day (3567 days earlier)      last day (41 days later) » 

 
1 hour later…
5:48 AM
@ArcticChar Thank you.
 
 
2 hours later…
7:26 AM
I don't want to pour more oil into the fire (do you say that in English?) but with respect to the recent discussion of handling a low-quality post: According to math.stackexchange.com/help/review-low-quality, that flag is for “answers that do not attempt to answer the question asked or contain only links and no explanation,” whereas “Incorrect answers should get a comment explaining any issues or be downvoted, not flagged.”
That specific answer did try to answer the question (even if the answer was wrong), so choosing “Looks OK“ seems justifiable to me.
Btw, the question about homeomorphism between function spaces could be a duplicate.
It is not my area of expertise, but I found some related questions with Approach0 and left comments at the question.
 
 
2 hours later…
9:18 AM
 
Off-topic question about Python syntax: math.stackexchange.com/q/4279435/42969
 
9:37 AM
 
10:06 AM
 
10:55 AM
 
11:30 AM
Another duplicate: math.stackexchange.com/q/4279852/42969 (for disclosure: I answered the suggested duplicate target).
 
 
2 hours later…
1:12 PM
@TeresaLisbon Hi, my C227 is still unfactored ...
 
@Peter Let me come to Hopf and copy down C227.
@Peter Got it, I'm running ECM on it right now, I'll let you know if there are any developments.
@MartinR Both duplicates have been closed.
 
1:31 PM
@JitendraSingh gone
 
Thanks @Peter
 
A general question about the procedure in this room. Assume that I suggested that a question is closed (deleted, reopened, ...). Later I see that this has been done. I (as one of the room owners) could now “delete” my message (move it to the trash). The advantage would be that other people are saved from clicking on the link only to see that it has already been handled. On the other hand, that hides my request from other people who might disagree with that resolution. – What do you think?
In SO Close Vote Reviewers (a similar room like this, for Stack Overflow, but a bit more formalized as far as I can see, with a long list of rules) this is handled with a script which periodically moves old requests to the SOCVR Request Graveyard.
 
@MartinR That is a great idea ! Sometimes, I worked through about 20 delete-vote requests from which the majority has already disappeared.
 
Then of course any room owner could delete any CURED requests if they see that they are completely handled.
Another question is if we want a dedicated room for completed requests (like the above mentioned SOCVR Request Graveyard) or if they should simply be moved to the Trash room.
 
1:46 PM
@JitendraSingh i thought you have deleted your account.see your past post
 
@MartinR The only qualms about doing so that I would have, is that not all room participants are room owners, and removing only some posts who leave behind an unrepresentative transcript of this rooms proceedings. We as room owners move questions, we do not delete them.
@MartinR I would be okay with a designated chatroom only for moved CURED requests (CURED ARCHIVE?) that are no longer active.
^^^^ That would be more transparent, I think.
 
@amWhy Yes, that is a problem. The room owners could of course try to move all completed request. But I cannot promise that I will always find the time (or the energy) to do that housekeeping, and I would not expect it from other room owners. Which means (as you said) that there may be an unequal treatment of CURED messages.
@amWhy I agree.
Speaking of room owners: It seems that Carl Mummert hasn't been seen in chat for almost three years, and hasn't been active on any Stack Exchange site for five month.
 
2:04 PM
@jasmine I deleted my Math SE account not other account
 
2:17 PM
@MartinR@amWhy Always support, whenever need some help for closure and deletion the low quality question .Just tag me. Im always ready to help .I usually spent daily 12-17 hrs on the MSE . I think this room is quite good .
okay@JitendraSingh
 
2:32 PM
@jasmine Thank you!
 
3:08 PM
 
4:05 PM
@Peter Gone.
@ArcticChar All your D's are gone except for D5.
@MartinR Yes. The removal was fine. It goes back aways, his addition as a room owner. I've left it because it was sort of "honorary", and I did not have the heart to remove it. But thanks for updating the room owners, and trimming when fitting.
 
 
2 hours later…
6:13 PM
Make sure to get some sleep, @Teresa! :-) And of course, hello! too.
 
@ArcticChar Your D4 needs one more delete-vote..
 
@user21820 D5, maybe? D4 was deleted two hours ago.
But D5 is now gone.
@user21820 Apologies, I thought you meant the more recent posts from Arctic. D4 from where you linked is now deleted. FYI, @ArcticChar
 
6:30 PM
@amWhy No problem. Thanks!
 
If you scroll up, @MartinR had a reasonable idea about moving posts from CURED when they are requests or conversations. One problem I found was that not all participants here are room owners. But if enough room owners would cover not only their own requests that have been handled, but a few others periodically, and if we create a chatroom and call it "CURED ARCHIVE", for transparency, it might help make CURED easier to navigate to check up on out standing requests.
What are your thoughts? I think it's wrong to "Trash them"; I think this could work if we designate the new Archive as "effective" at its creation and forward. Too much work to transfer every such post from this chat's start.
So Archive not be the best identifier. We could consider checking with mods and/or @MartinSleziak If there's a way to move a lot of content quickly, and if not, perhaps we can make this room the CURED ARCHIVE, and transfer only unhandled matters to a NEW CURED chatroom, with an appropriate identifier.
I meant in my first sentence in the first comment, @user21820, "moving posts from CURED when they've been handled, or conversations have ended.
If I've messed this up, @MartinR, feel free to summarize.
 
7:02 PM
@amWhy I would think that it is not necessary to touch past messages. Applying the new procedure (if we can agree on some) to future messages seems sufficient to me. So I would keep this room as it is, and move outdated requests to a CURED ARCHIVE, as you suggested.
Let's wait (a few days at least) for more suggestions and opinions.
 
@MartinR Sound good to me. Thanks for opening this discussion.
 
7:30 PM
@user21820: Just mentioning that two room owners of the “Logic” room haven't been seen in chat for two years or more (and inactive on Stack Exchange in general), so you may want to remove them from the list. I just removed one of them of the list of this room's owners.
 
That reminds me that long time ago a room called CRUDE archive was created - but it seems that it was never actually used.
Jan 23 '19 at 20:55, by Lord_Farin
In order to achieve the second part of the (semi-)automation, I have created "CRUDE Archive"
 
@MartinSleziak If anyone remembers such things, it's you!
 
@MartinSleziak Wow! Thanks for the link!
@MartinR That's why I pinged him!! But he is on top of so many chatrooms (if about to freeze, etc), and he was instrumental in helping us resurrect CRUDE (now CURED) many years back!
 
@amWhy You should know it, you are a room owner of CRUDE Archive :)
It seems that in the two month history of CRUDE Archive, only a few messages were moved from (then) CRUDE before it was frozen for inactivity.
 
@MartinR Wow; yes, you are right! Wow, again: I rarely forget anything. Perhaps I faced a suspension shorty after its creation, but I think it's been longer since I was last suspended for any lengthy time.
Well, it can always be reopened (unfrozen), if the will is there.
 
8:03 PM
@MartinR Yes I'm aware of that, thanks! I just didn't feel like removing them haha..
 
@MartinR I'm thinking that might have coincided with when the name change of this chatroom occurred; I changed the name from CRUDE to CURED, after consulting with participants. It seems clear that Lord Farin created the chatroom. I'll have to do a whole lot of searching to find whether that coincides anywhere near when the name of this room was changed. Name change only; it was the same site it had been.
I'll look into it, and hopefully @Xander can help fill in the details, as he was listed as a room owner, as well.
 
@amWhy @MartinR: I don't know about the archiving idea. I thought quite a number of people are already using some script that overlays the status of the requests? I'm not using that script because I just shift-midclick-midclick-midclick, but if people find that overlay script convenient enough then it might be easier than trying to do this archiving.
In previous discussions I recall there was also a point brought up that it would mess things up if we archived a request but not chat messages discussing some request.
 
@user21820 That's true.
 
@MartinSleziak: Do you have a link to the overlay script? In case anyone who isn't using it wants to try it out.
 
@user21820 That's another good point....
@user21820 Yes, thanks. But, realizing I may sound archaic, I don't know how to incorporate scripts. I do want to learn, but I'm afraid my browser and or computer is not doing well with add ons :( Time for a replacement, at least my home computer, methinks.
 
8:16 PM
@user21820 This. I am not sure that there is much need for an archive.
 
@XanderHenderson Can you link to the script you're using? Is it a GM/TM script?
 
@XanderHenderson Thanks for the input. I think we'd end up where the last attempt at an archive ended up. @user21820 brought up some great points, and I for one already spend so much time in a couple of chatrooms, reviewing, flagging on meta, etc., I can not foresee having the time to properly manage an archive.
 
@user21820 I don't know what script I am using, and I don't have it installed on this computer.
I'll try to remember to post a link this evening when I get home.
 
Oh ok thanks.
I need to go. See you all around!
 
8:34 PM
@user21820 See you!
^^^ I'll bring it up in three days if it's still closed. Else we can downvote sufficiently, or we can delete the answer. I have flagged the answer.
 
 
1 hour later…
9:52 PM
 
10:16 PM
1 message moved to ­Trash
 

« first day (3567 days earlier)      last day (41 days later) »