@XanderHenderson I have enough arguments. And I haven't said anything yet. Not saying anything justifies the others. I will defend in Meta or here. But it is not very suitable here to explain my arguments.

" Not saying anything doesn't justify others."

@XanderHenderson I was going to delete the question already and I would have lost +3 already. Why should I argue for down/close votes here? "-8" that can't hurt me.

@XanderHenderson As a final comment, I'll do my defense in the Meta. I do not find it right to answer everybody one by one here. I wish you a good day. Thank you for your interest. Well-being.

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Repeating characters in answer (80): Solving for Function with Given Indicated Values by poop on math.SE

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Few unique characters in answer, repeating words in answer (174): Is it crazy for me to retake Calculus, 38 years later? ✏️ by David on math.SE

I had voted to close math.stackexchange.com/q/4143370 as a duplicate of math.stackexchange.com/q/2578657 because it looks like the identical question to me, and the older thread has good answers. This was confirmed by the author of the question.

Later, the question was reopened by a gold-badge holder who had answered the newer question. The same person then also added the identical answer to the older question.

The rationale for these actions is unclear to me: If the newer question is considered better then there should be a vote to close the older one as a duplicate of the newer one, that did not happen. And why post the same answer twice (which in my eyes confirms that the questions are duplicates of each other)?

Since the older question math.stackexchange.com/q/2578657 has some very good answers, I suggest to close the newer math.stackexchange.com/q/4143370 as a duplicate again.

@MartinR This seems like pretty iffy behavior on the part of the reopener. I agree with your argument to close the question as a duplicate and have voted as such.

D

D

@Peter Closed questions with a negative score and no answers are deleted automatically.

D

C/D

I would like to hear opinions about the question mentioned in this room concerning a base - 1 - system. For me, such a system does not make sense and can therefore not exist.

Personal advice

@Peter I disagree. The unary number system is well known and even has a wikipedia article.

@Peter I might not make sense to you, but it definitely exists

math.stackexchange.com/q/4144153/357390 should I warn the answerer about EoQS?

@ParclyTaxel Yes, I think you can.

Hi Teresa

Do you know much about non-local PDE?

close

C/D

→ 12 messages moved to ­Trash

PSQ

@amWhy @amWhy Yes, sorry, I do know how to use the "reply" function. Honest. (I just forget to use it.)

PSQ improvement comment left, anybody can continue the thread.

PSQ needs some work regarding OP level.

@Peter The wrong answer ought to be deleted. I don't know which users like to go around upvoting wrong answers, but recently there have been such users.

@Peter That strange question is now up for deletion.

@TeresaLisbon That PSQ is up for deletion.

This post is in my opinion too opinion-based to be suitable for Math SE. I flagged for migration to MathEd SE, but the moderator who handled it refused. What do you all think? @amWhy @TeresaLisbon @Peter @ParamanandSingh

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Repeating characters in answer (80): Independent random variables - Finding $P(X = Y )$ and $P(X ≤ Y )$ by marlon olaya on math.SE

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted user (71): If $X$ and $Y$ are i.i.d. random variables, is $P(X < Y) = P(Y < X)$? by marlon olaya on math.SE

@user21820 Clearly wrong decision. But the moderators also do not handle their own definition of spam properly. It is a post with the only purpose to advertise. But this definition is very broad and I often had a completely other opinion whether it applied to a specific post or not.

Although most of the posts were deleted eventually anyway, this is annoying.

here we have two delete-votes, but still 2 are needed. What is going on ?

@Peter Many upvotes increases the delete-votes needed.

1/2 more needed now.

please check this question @user21820

@ParamanandSingh Flag?

@ParamanandSingh This was already posted ...

@Peter No it was not. It is a brand new copy of the bad question.

This is what I meant. It has already be posted.

the one needing 4 delete-votes got another upvote.

Oh. Anyway Paramanand is clearly asking for it to be dealt with. I think it should be flagged for moderator attention, because re-posting questions like this is circumventing the system.

@PedroTamaroff: Thanks for the quick closure.

@ParamanandSingh I have closed it for the moment, since there seems to be some weird dynamic happening where the OP is challenging people to give an answer, or something...

close

@vitamind why not ask the OP to formulate a question instead?

@PedroTamaroff: thanks! It was really weird for asker to challenge people.

Or notice questions in the line of "is this correct?" are not encouraged?

@PedroTamaroff It's not just challenging; it started with a wrong answer linked from that post, which was rightly criticized and deleted, but the author for some reason thinks that it is correct as long as nobody posts a counter-example to the reasoning, and posted the same question again after the previous one got deleted.

@vitamind Sorry, but a question with a clear trial (whether correct or not) should not be closed.

@PedroTamaroff I probably should have done this, yes. I was just confused, the OP is a member for 2 and a half years and I think/thought that he is familiar we the "basic" policies. I have written my comment as soon as I saw the question, and I agree, it was too fast and I did not make the correct decision.

@Peter I think I read somewhere in Meta that such "questions" are not suited for math.se. (Maybe this has changed, I don't know.)

If the trial is too complicated or is about a famous open problem, it is off-topic since this is not the purpose of this site. But this is not the case here.

@Peter @ParamanandSingh: Note this.

@vitamind No, I don't think solution verification or proof verification questions are off topic, or ever have been off topic. There are even tags for them! (On the other hand, I don't think they are suited to Math.SE, in the sense that they can be tricky to answer; see for example here.)

@Peter Ok, if that's the case I'm okay with these questions in the future. I understand sorry for causing confusion/problems in here. Anyway it seems that it is a duplicate (repost).

@user21820 Very confusing. Which one is the original and which the many duplicates ?

@Peter I'm too lazy to look at the time-stamps. All I know is that they are all clogging up the site.

So , this is a duplicate and still needs one delete-vote.

@Peter Why do you keep linking to the 'answer' instead of the question?

Sorry, I was too quick and accidently hit the answer twice.

Again. Have you all flagged these yet?

Obviously, user actions are useless to stop this spam, so we need to flag down a moderator.

If you did not flag it yet, which text do you suggest ?

@Peter I already flagged both, but still pending. I flagged for mod as spam of the same wrong mathematics.

So, you think we should wait with the deletions ? I think, even a flag of a deleted post can be handled by the moderators. By the way, "spam" is unlucky since it only applies on advertising posts. I do not think that this is considered to be advertising.

Um, I thought it is clear-cut spam because it is just repeated over and over again. We shall see what happens.

^ Please upvote this comment so that jimjim can no longer give the excuse that no counter-example was provided.

It uses subtraction of divergent series and shifting of terms just like in the erroneous post.

@user21820: the user is definitely not interested in any discussion involving sound mathematical arguments. I have flagged one of their deleted answers, but don't know how mods can talk some math sense into them.

Everytime, I want to link to the question with the three delete-votes , I link the answer. What do I do wrong ?

@Peter: usually each post (q as well as a) has a share link. That link should work

@Peter Probably you are copying the URL, which is how you got there, not the direct link to the question.

D

@user21820 Your counterexample apparently did not help to stop the user.

@Peter I knew it wouldn't. It was just to prevent the lame excuse (that there is no counter-example).

I think the best is to disengage with the user. Mods have been notified and Pedro also took note of their question. So maybe they will find some way out

@ParamanandSingh I will disengage once it gets too ridiculous.

Hopefully, my last comment actually worked.

@ParamanandSingh: I can't believe it. It appears to have worked.

Now , it is even answered :(

@Peter You can still ask for closure and deletion. Remember the excuse for spamming was "I don't care if it is deleted as long as I get a counter-example"?

this is no reason to give an answer. Moreover, why did the user accept this answer, but not the other counterexample ?

@Peter jimjim finally did accept my counter-example in the last few comments.

@user21820: you finally managed to talk some math sense into that user. Congrats!!

@ParamanandSingh Thanks. I hope it was worth it.

Besides of the answer, it was worth it.

I wasn't expecting that to happen, but well mathse often surprises me in various ways.

Unfortunately, a similar discussion about big bang and CO would not lead to a final admit that it is false. Here , it miraculously worked.

The answer is the small price to this achievement.

Of course upvoted although it should not have been given.

D

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Repeating characters in answer (80): Turing Decidability of language $L = [{<D>} :$ encoding of a DFA D s.t. ${|L(D)| <= 50}]$ by Jose-Daniel Diaz on math.SE

close1

@Peter What is "CO"?

^ @Peter @ParamanandSingh @vitamind: By the way, did you see this?

The correct answer by Evan has less upvotes than the wrong answer by Donald...

D1, D2, D3.

D4, D5, D6.

D7, D8, D9.

D10, D11, D12.

@user21820 Stands for "and similar stuff"

PSQ