12:18 AM
@Xander No problem ^^^^. No rush.

12:32 AM
@amWhy I'll have a look.
Ugh... that whole comment thread is a mess. I've deleted most of it. Thanks for the heads up.

@XanderHenderson I had just seen. Good decision!

1:00 AM
@amWhy Reopen the post? Progress added.

4 hours later…
5:20 AM
@JohnOmielan Ah, I see. Thanks for the information. Yes, I would have suspected something like this to be the case since the gap between closure and answer was maybe 70-80 seconds. Fair enough, that question is worthy of deletion anyway.
@amWhy This question has now been improved. The OP noted conversation in the answer. Having said that technically both answers have come before the improvement. As usual I flagged the one where I know the user has been warned before, and noted the fuzziness and warmth of the EoQS comment!
@XanderHenderson The user is confused, I feel we should be there to handhold them, and let them make their question more precise, because I think OP is the kind of person who has really tried to put all their thoughts together. It would be a shame if this did not work out, but it would be a worse shame if we didn't help. I'd ask for closure, but not deletion as it stands now.

6:11 AM
close this PSQ. I have commented about EoQS in one of the answers.

6:56 AM
I suggest to delete this wrong answer. The AM-GM inequality is used in the wrong direction (as pointed out in the comments).

@ParamanandSingh Oho : I've already informed this user, they read it and responded politely. Now that we know this, the next you can flag. The date of information is 4/05/21 (I was working at midnight so it may have been 5/05/21, any one is ok), perhaps flagging should come in to play.
@MartinR voted to delete, it's definitely wrong
@ParamanandSingh Also noting that this could be duplicate, but I'm cutting veggies so I can't search for a duplicate when I'm also searching for seeds. Please do the needful!

Just in case any of you haven't noticed yet: Approach0 is currently out of service:
in In the search of a question, yesterday, by Wei Zhong
Announcement: Because we are using approach0 to attend a math search competition, and to the best of my team interests, approach0 will resume service after May 12.
I currently use SearchOnMath as a substitute.

7:27 AM
@MartinR: that wrong answer is now gone. It was rather surprising that a Bounty was offered on it.

7:47 AM
Double angle formula broken? is actually the question how to take square roots on both sides of an equation. Can someone suggest a duplicate target?

2 hours later…
10:08 AM

10:20 AM
@XanderHenderson maybe you can post this template as an answer here: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4925/… ?

10:50 AM
@MartinR Thank you very much for the announcement. I was not aware of this, although the last time I checked (which was maybe 13 hours ago) it was opening. Great, I'll use SOM.

11:40 AM

12:07 PM

12:23 PM
@ParamanandSingh Not a PSQ, retract the close votes!
Sorry I was arguing about technicalities

@ParclyTaxel Did you just - did you write a fake attempt into someones question so it does not get closed? I'm sorry maybe I am overseeing smth.

@vitamind No, OP's question was originally a good one, and then OP changed their own question after I wrote an answer
I rolled back the changes to the good revision
Check history

Okay I can see it! Thanks. If it gets closed, I'll vote to reopen it. (Retracted close -vote.)

@ParclyTaxel thanks for telling us. I retracted my close vote

Arg... there was no reason for this question to be reopened. It was a poor question off the bat, and a duplicate many times over!
The asker improved the question, but we don't need it on the site!
I am not going to re-close it, as I unilaterally closed it in the first place, but... ARG!

12:33 PM
@XanderHenderson is math.stackexchange.com/questions/32199/… a good dupe target? I can vote to close as dupe

@supinf Read the comment thread. I think that closure and deletion are best for that question.
Yes, it is a duplicate, but it offers nothing new over the other duplicates. And closing it for any reason other that it being a duplicate lets roomba pick it up later.

@ParclyTaxel: I later checked the revision. It is eery weird why asker edited out their own attempt from the question. The current rollback done by you is fine. I hope asker does not change it again. Also you may then ignore my comment about EoQS meta post.

@XanderHenderson roomba?

@ParclyTaxel: will retract my close vote.

@ParclyTaxel The tool which automatically deletes closed posts.

12:43 PM

@XanderHenderson i voted to close for missing context. hope this was correct

@supinf It is neither correct nor incorrect. I have a very strong opinion that the question should be closed and deleted, but I don't want to abuse my super-diamond powers to do it. If the rest of the community disagrees with me, I will swallow my frustration and put up with it.
However, if you agree with me that the question adds nothing new to the site, then closing it for lacking context will ultimately lead to the question's deletion. In that sense, your action is "correct".

@XanderHenderson "neither correct nor incorrect"... maybe I should read up on the Godel incompleteness theorems ;)

Heh.

1:02 PM
math.stackexchange.com/questions/4126665/… has been hovering at 4 closes for the past few days; I've already voted on it

1:38 PM
D1, D2, D3.
D4, D5, D6.
D7, D8, D9.
C1, C2, C3.
C4, C5, C6.
C7, C8, C9.

Voted on all the "D" questions, but I'm running out of close votes

@ParclyTaxel Thanks! No problem, others can help too. =)
@ParclyTaxel Did you also flag the post? Besides rolling back, you should flag it for moderator attention as per this.

@user21820 I took care of it myself, no worries
I had to argue with the OP over a point I know is very trivial, during which time Paramanand voted to close

@ParclyTaxel Oh no I don't mean it's to get the moderator to do anything, but it's so that the moderators have a record. If the user repeatedly erases his/her posts the moderators can see all the flagged instances.
If nobody flags, then nobody knows.

@user21820 I put a flag up

1:48 PM
Ok!

math.stackexchange.com/questions/4130681/… is this question good enough for me to answer?
Quite short but the source is given

@ParclyTaxel Since the asker specifically pinpoints a single step in an existing proof and (just) gave some thought about it, I think it's okay.

2:16 PM
@Xander Will you take a look at my comment below this question, which came up in reopen queue, due to an overambitious suggesting editor? I see this every single day, many times; other users step in to beautify a question, after it's closure, thereby robbing the OP the chance to improve the question, and having the improvement sent to the reopen review queue. Can we consider a meta post, or comment template, to address this sort of situation?

@user21820 @ParclyTaxel @ParamanandSingh In this case, the OP has had quite a bit of history, and engaging with them only results in pestering behaviour.

@amWhy Looks good to me.
I would endorse a meta post, but don't have a lot of time or energy to write such a thing between now and 10 days from now.

@XanderHenderson I consider it, and perhaps run it by you, before I post it.
@Xander Another option to pursue: I could edit into the suggestions for editing, suggesting an edit meta post, a bullet or answer, "Please do not beautify a post that has already been closed,... and why not"?

@amWhy Oh, that would be good. Or just post a new answer there.
A new answer here would probably be useful. If you don't get to it, I'll like get to is in the next couple of weeks. I just put it on my todo list.

Thanks. I wish we could reject an edit based on the above consideration, though I could possibly select "causes harm", and then insert a comment template into the text field.

2:40 PM
All D's from your D's above, @user21820 don't exist!!

@amWhy Thank you! =)
@TheSimpliFire Thanks. I didn't know about that. Indeed, most users who self-vandalize have "quite a bit of [problem] history".

3 hours later…
5:17 PM
Anyone have any cool math facts? does not seem on-topic to me. I have flagged it as "Opinion-based" but would appreciate it if more eyes could take a look. I'll note that the OP has already accepted an answer, which is a bit surprising.

@TheAmplitwist I have seen a lot of questions which go in this direction (which weren't closed). This may be a dupe but if it's not, this should at least be a Community Wiki question.

@TheAmplitwist , @vitamind It is too broad for even a big list.

@vitamind To the best of my knowledge, there haven't been any recent questions of this kind, so I presumed that the site culture has shifted to make such questions off-topic. I agree that if it is to be open, then it should be Community Wiki, at least.

Clarification: I'm not saying that it should not be closed, I'm saying that if it stays open, it should be a CW (in my opinion of course).
@TheAmplitwist I agree. Anyway, I voted to close it.

5:28 PM
@amWhy Cool fact 1 : I did it! Cool fact 2 : It's closed, a certain Henderson helped out.

Frankly, one of the coolest math facts I know is that one and one is two.
For most values of two.

Thanks everyone, including @Xander, who got to vote like a regular voter casting the 5th and final dv!!!
@XanderHenderson Yes! What's funny was I was tempted to write that as an answer!!
I mean, where would we be, without 1+1 = 2 most everywhere except in base 2 addition?

@amWhy Hear, hear!

$1+1=0$.
Thus $1=-1$.

@XanderHenderson $1+1 = 0\pmod 2$
@XanderHenderson Oh, boy, if I didn't know you, I'd warn everyone that a fake proof is a'comin'

5:34 PM
@amWhy No. Just demonstrating how stupid the field with two elements is.

@XanderHenderson Hah!

$1 = 1\cdot 1 \implies 1 = 1^{-1}$.

The question is indeed off-topic, but I nevertheless coin in another fact that astonished me : The series of reciprocals of the primes of the form $an+b$ diverges whenever $a$ and $b$ are coprime. Considering how slow the series of the reciprocals of the primes diverges , this is sensational !

@XanderHenderson It is stupid when a user refers to the field with two elements in an answer to a 13 year old 8th grader.

@amWhy No doubt.
Even stupider is this guy.
"Look at me! I'm a field! But I'm not! And I only have one element! Derp!"

5:39 PM
@XanderHenderson In that particular case, yes, but the Tits-Bruhat order for Coxeter groups is one of the most natural and combinatorially rich orders.

@TeresaLisbon Ah! There is a the problem! I am an analysis supremacist. Combinatorics is for lesser minds. :P

@XanderHenderson Thought that a field must contain at least two distinct elements.

Almost time for a meeting. :\

@Xander I cast a flag on this recent comment:
@amWhy You must be super bored on a Friday afternoon to close a question that was receiving upvotes, comments, and answers. — MathIsLife12 9 mins ago

@XanderHenderson An analysis supremacist! I too work in analysis, I mean, PDE-probability type relations, but I happen to know this since analysis comes into play with the Kazhdan-Luzstig type polynomials for counting orders. In particular, a very clever algorithm was designed in 2017, which used root finding on the polynomial and related it to an order counting problem. The connections also involved complex analysis. It's fascinating.

5:42 PM
@amWhy Ugh.

I'm a little fed up right now with disgruntled users, @Xander.

@vitamind A good example of an utterly overupvoted post. I do not think that there is a chance to get rid of such questions.

@vitamind I don't want to wait around and see if someone answers. I invite users to Close this, as suggest from vitamin d.

@amWhy Well, we timed this well.

5:47 PM
I have not many books about fields, but in every such book it is required that a field has at least two elements, and every reasonable mathematician would require it as well.

(Note : is anybody keeping , very roughly , track of the users they have EOQSed before?)
This is so that their subsequent answers can be flagged, rather than the message being put there again.

@vitamind How did that question come up?

I've kept track of some users, but I want to avoid multi-comments, so I'll post here without commenting unless I'm very sure the user hasn't been informed.

@XanderHenderson Highest upvoted post in , which is unanswered.

Interesting search criterion...

5:54 PM
(Not anymore. Probably because it's closed.)

Note, unless we delete (after one more downvote this question), this answer will continue to expand, as it already has
As my comment below that answer notes, the answerer first answered before closure, so he's got free reign on adding more and more examples. I wish edits to answers for blocked after a question closure. @Xander What about the last sentence?

@XanderHenderson I was curious :P

@amWhy The answer you linked can be deleted, as can the question.

@amWhy There are legitimate use cases for editing after closure. In this case, it feels a little on the edge of what is acceptable, but I am not sure that there is any reason to get upset about it, or to take further action. Note that I am keeping an eye on it (though I have a meeting in 30 minutes).

@TeresaLisbon Gone. And thanks, Teresa.

6:00 PM
@amWhy Welcome, once again we timed it well.

@XanderHenderson I realize there are good reasons to allow that, but to me I think the answerer crossed that edge.

@amWhy It crossed the "if I were a regular user, I would vote to delete" line, but not the "I am going to diamond-hammer that answer" line.
And the question was deleted while I was replying to the answerer. :\

@XanderHenderson ;)
@XanderHenderson Awesome, thanks! It would have likely taken two dozen of us to come up with sufficient votes to close! ;D

@amWhy I thought it only took five votes to close, always, but more votes to delete?
I can never keep this s... straight. :\

Not really understanding the supremacy/ego mindset here. I asked a question, similar to many before, that was receiving upvotes, comments, and answers. It was then closed for being “opinion-based” which makes no sense because I was literally asking people for opinions on math facts. Next, you all proceeded to answer my question and discuss it for at least 10 minutes in chat. An you are STILL talking about it.

6:05 PM
"... I was literally asking people for opinions..."
Precisely.
It is, however, a bad question for Math SE.

@XanderHenderson Then you should spend your time trying to gather your crew to close the hundreds of opinion related questions that I see every day.

I would invite you to please remain civil.

Not really sure how I am not being civil. It just appears that no one here can take criticism from someone “below.”

@MathIsLife12 You can help us to close them :)

In any event, hundreds, if not thousands of questions are asked every day. Most of them are not a good fight for this site. Many ill-fitting questions slip through the cracks.

6:08 PM
Note : I've observed the following trend among users, where a low-quality question is answered by a user who seeks a particular clarification, gets it in the comments, and then answers the question without necessarily requesting for improvement. An example of that seems to be here (I checked the order of comments/closure/answer etc.)
This behaviour doesn't improve the question post but places context in the comments. We can ask answerers to request users to reply to comments / place important comments in the question post itself. It's a useful thing to do.

@TeresaLisbon That's a great point. A question's improvement should be easily available to all who may want to answer; so seeking clarification so one can then answer, without encouraging the asker to make the edit visible in the post, is rather selfish.

Right... I'm off to a faculty association meeting. We're gonna talk about four year degrees!
(Thanks Governor Ducey!)
Er... oops. Typo. I fixed it. The man's name is Ducey, not anything else, even if the typo is more apt.

The legislation is pretty narrrow.

@amWhy Yes. Our aim should be to convert that selfishness into productivity, since anything left in the comments goes straight up to the question post and is useful, if not the whole context itself.

6:17 PM
We arer hopiinig to get an ed program and a nursing program in 3-4 years.
I am hopinig tha wwewcan offerr paleontology ni a decade.

@XanderHenderson That'd be great!

Astronomywouldl be good, too, given how darrkk the skiies aer here.
STUPIID KKEYBAOR!
exuent Xander

@XanderHenderson Hah! Amazingly, we're all detectives here, so we can figure it out!!
@XanderHenderson I'm guessing @Xander is exiting?
But it would be great if you were describing himself as "exuberant Xander" ;D

Xander Henderson's fingers ask him : (goosey goosey Xander, whither shall I wander?)

@TeresaLisbon Hah! I love it!!
I will try to remember EXUBERANCE for a word search. Three e's, one u, and one a!
Imaging EXUBERANCE IS CONTAGIOUS ??

6:26 PM
@amWhy That one's amazing. I could have a field day with that one!
@vitamind Second line is an attempt, right? It seems to be useful too.