« first day (3383 days earlier)      last day (61 days later) » 

3:30 AM
2
Q: What is the value of the following integral of a quotient of sines?

ChrisI am familiar with the following integral for a quotient of squares of sines in terms of the Bessel function of the first kind $J$: $$ \int_{0}^{\pi}\frac{\sin^{2}\left(\frac{N}{2}\cos(\theta)\right)}{\sin^{2}\left(\frac{1}{2}\cos(\theta)\right)}\,d\theta=\pi\left(N+2\sum_{n=1}^{N-1}(N-n)J_{0}(n)...

Yet another PSQ.
sometimes I wish PSQ closures resulted in question/answer bans. Would make things SO much easier.
 
 
1 hour later…
4:35 AM
@user64742 Slightly unsure about completely dismissing this, however do agree that it misses something that the moment. The user mentions that they have seen a similar integral , and also mentions where the integral comes up. That's a good start. Somebody has to keep it going.
 
5:22 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted website in answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer (95): The locus of the intersection point of two perpendicular tangents to a given ellipse by user15565231 on math.SE
 
5:58 AM
@SmokeDetector That linked answer is clearly spam. I've downvoted & flagged it as such.
 
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Potentially bad keyword in answer, blacklisted user (72): The locus of the intersection point of two perpendicular tangents to a given ellipse by Nitin Garg on math.SE
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer, blacklisted user (73): The locus of the intersection point of two perpendicular tangents to a given ellipse by Nitin Garg on math.SE
 
that user is spamming repeatedly
he should be removed
 
@Euler2 Hopefully the system will get rid.
 
@Euler2 I agree. I've also down voted and flagged the other remaining one as well.
 
there should be a way to flag a user
we can only flag his/her posts
 
6:25 AM
For anybody interested, the Meta post Should the spam handling guidance be consolidated into a single post? has some useful links to other posts re: dealing with spam. For example, the 4th one about whether or not to downvote. However, it seems they deal mostly with questions, not answers so, for example, I believe downvoting an answer is still worthwhile, especially since it doesn't appear to happen automatically as it does with questions.
 
 
2 hours later…
8:52 AM
I have self-deleted this post , it seems I was making some premature assumptions that answerers must help, while the advice seems to be that this should not be imposed. More conversation from here is available as well.
We have also lost today, one of the shining lights of comedy in South India, a great and humble gentleman , Vivekanandan was capable of the subtle and the slapstick in equal measure and was one of the most kind, unbiased and respected people in Indian comedy. Oof, I'm feeling very down today.
 
 
1 hour later…
10:22 AM
Don't know if we should close this post. I think it needs more details and clarity and the OP does not know what he/her's talking about.
 
10:46 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Few unique characters in body, no whitespace in body, potentially bad keyword in body, repeating characters in title (259): ===================== ✏️ by sherryyyy on math.SE
 
@SmokeDetector This seems to have been vandalised. @vitamind That post got self-deleted.
 
@TeresaLisbon What is the status of the close review queue ? The last days I reviewed many posts and hope that I could contribute to reduce the posts in the queue.
 
@Peter 176 reviewed, 430 need review. I need to do my quota today as well.
I think this is better than what I've seen recently. But one thing is grim : not many people review at all. You are one of only seven people to have reviewed 20 questions today, and one of 11 to have reviewed at all. This may have time zone related reasons, but it's still bleak!
 
11:18 AM
I've come to the conclusion, following my experiment yesterday and further reading on meta, that too many people have too many opinions here, the ecosystem is too diverse to encourage too much uniformization. While my efforts will continue, I don't think that I am ready to escalate matters with users, when meta alone does not seem to provide a consensus. I will now stop the comments below answers, but close and delete efforts will very much continue.
There are people on meta who openly admitted that they did not follow the site rules as they do not agree with them, although such people eventually left the site or abandoned it. If this behaviour is observed among users, then all I can do on my part is do what I've been doing so far, since questioning is about as useful as having an grasshopper carry a table across the Sahara.
 
@TeresaLisbon: the grasshopper analogy is quite new (and picturesque too) for me.
Also I am not really sure why people are not investing in review queues given that there is now a gold badge available for every 1000 review tasks. May be the incentive via rep is more important than via badge for many.
 
11:49 AM
I suggest to close math.stackexchange.com/q/4105417/42969 as “needs detail or clarity.” The posted equation is obviously wrong. The actual equation is hidden behind a link to a screenshot, and my comments did not cause the question to be improved.
 
Not about Math. (I clicked the wrong close-reason accidentally.)
 
 
1 hour later…
1:01 PM
@MartinR I also want to say this, the pair of answerers who have answered your question often co-answer questions, where one attempts and the other either follows on, or derives cues from.
 
 
3 hours later…
3:56 PM
D1, D2, D3.
D4, D5, D6.
D7, D8, D9.
C1, C2, C3.
C4, C5, C6.
C7, C8, C9.
@TeresaLisbon Haha.. I thought an even better analogy would be that it is as useful as having a table carry a grasshopper across the Sahara, where the table is carried by you. @ParamanandSingh
@MartinR Closed!
 
4:22 PM
PSQ (and a multiple duplicate): math.stackexchange.com/q/4105716/42969
 
4:59 PM
Not sure if this is a PSQ but the question as well as the answer do not give much value to this site.
 
5:20 PM
@vitamind Unless someone takes on Oliver's hint and converts it into something tangible, then we could have a nice and constructive answer , and one that can serve as a duplicate target, given that I don't think we have specific examples where functions are shown to contradict the Liouville condition for elementarity(yes, this is a word!) of the anti-derivative.
 
@user64742 Not nonsense, but definitely not on site here, although I'm of the opinion that one should check the provided answers and make sure that nothing very wrong is said, that's all. Worse than us closing and deleting, is having a misguided user.
 
6:00 PM
@user21820: your C9 is a gentle reminder of my past (I have an answer there). I wouldn't vote to close as I have already been involved in "answering and voting to close" once.
 
6:48 PM
1 message moved to ­Trash
 
Question : express, in one word, your thoughts on the following occurence. "Ten answers in five hours".
Oh, add "from the same user".
My word is "flocci­nauci­nihili­pili­fication".
To be fair, only one of them was a PSQ. With that, the Saturday transforms into the Sunday and I merge with the bed. Good night!
 
7:20 PM
@user64742 You seem to be highlighting posts here which are rather old. With respect to the actions that I, personally, am inclined to take, I typically let old posts go. I also find it a little odd that both of those are questions which you answered. :\
 
@XanderHenderson I wasn’t finding PSQs quickly enough by looking on the main page so I started browsing any old questions I interacted with.
 
"Not being able to find PSQs" is a good thing, n'est-ce pas?
I mean, if you can't find PSQs, it means that you can take a break and maybe write some answers!
I would consider that a good day. :D
 
@user64742 Please make sure you are not targeting specific users to find "old PSQs" they may have answered, when the site had many, many fewer users, and standards were different.
 
@amWhy it’s only targeting when you harass users. Your supposed to constantly go back and self-moderate. Make sure everything is still allowed.
...don’t you?
 
7:36 PM
@user64742 No. This is not correct.
There is a general prohibition on targeting any user for any reason.
 
@XanderHenderson it’s not targetting
 
On the one end, you should not be upvoting posts just because you like the user.
On the other end, you should not be targeting users for harassment.
 
Right I get that
 
@user64742 I am replying directly to your assertion that "it’s only targeting when you harass users."
 
Any action that is done repeatedly against a user is harassment imo
even upvoting
 
7:38 PM
I think that we are going to have to agree to disagree on that one.
A common occurrence on this site is that a group of users will form a mutual admiration society, and upvote each other's posts. For example, a bunch of students in one class may upvote each other's questions.
This is not harassment.
Harassment is behaviour which is meant to threaten or intimidate.
 
Ah ok
i more meant to say “you can’t target yourself”
for example targeted editing is not allowed
but obviously this doesn’t apply to your own posts
 
I honestly was not commenting on whether or not directing attention to old posts with which you have had interaction was targeted behaviour or not. I am not bothered by it, aside from the fact that I don't think that there is much need to clean up old posts (it is more important, in my opinion, to focus on maintaining standards today).
 
@user64742 Please lighten up on yourself. I know you are trying to be consistent and most of the questions you posted here are one's you answered, and that you have deleted your answers within the last hour or so. But understand, for your sake, and others sakes, this site was very different from what it is today. Fewer user, a fraction of the questions we get now. In any case, I know you are very sincere in wanting to abide by standards in place now, but you need not go back to old posts to
to apply those standards to answers posted under other, more lenient standards.
Indeed, I checked your "nominations" for closure/deletion" and the only recurring name I found among answers was your name, @user64742. But you've had a habit of doing the same thing, many times in the past, seeking to have your questions deleted, then returning to request reopening, then requesting deletion. You can delete your answers whenever you want to, but don't throw out the baby with the bath water.
 
8:16 PM
 

« first day (3383 days earlier)      last day (61 days later) »