12:00 AM
@BillDubuque its not the same question. It helps because of searchability, and I'm not sure if this is how duplicate system is meant to be used according to the policies of this site.
But since I'm only one person, and I'm not super knowledgeable about the policies of this site, I'd rather consult third party than pass further judgements
12:21 AM
@Jakobian Spamming the site with hundreds of dupes of common exercises is not a good way to improve searchability.
2
You closing comment indicates that its not a direct duplicate of the other questions

2 hours later…
2:13 AM
10 messages moved to ­Trash
C1 (with a pity vote)

2 hours later…
4:12 AM
0

I created a new variant of Collatz Procedure. As always, when we encounter a even $x$, we apply $x \rightarrow x/2$. However, if we encounter a odd $x$, we have the freedom to choose any natural number $N≥2$ and apply $x \rightarrow x^N - 1$. It seems that there are values of $x$ where $1$ is not...

3 hours later…
6:56 AM
C/D check my proof lacking necessary context (which step is in doubt and why so)

2 hours later…
9:03 AM

1 hour later…
10:11 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Mostly non-latin body (78): Is it possible to define a soft vector on any space?‭ by Morteza‭ on math.SE

2 hours later…
12:37 PM
0

Recently i got interested at a Relaxation of Collatz Conjecture. This goes just like the normal Collatz procedure, except when $x$ is even, you have the choice of applying either $x \rightarrow 3x+1$ or $x \rightarrow x/2$. The idea of adding the ability to chose to Collatz procedure intrigues me...

2 hours later…
2:36 PM
@Jakobian Not my area of expertise. All of those modular arithmetic problems look the same to me, and none of them interest me. I honestly don't care what happens to them.
@XanderHenderson Its not my area of expertise either. But Bill voted to close it as duplicate using two questions as an argument for why it is a duplicate. Both of them together imply this question. But why would that means its a duplicate of them?
That I don't really understand
If two questions together, not separately, imply it, then can we call it a duplicate?
3:01 PM
Besides I think this is one of those cases where it helps to not be an expert, I think
3:36 PM
@Jakobian Do the two linked questions provide an answer, when combined?
heavily upvoted , but debatable since I would define "listable" in another way.
4:15 PM
@XanderHenderson it seems so, yes
But not alone
C context-lacking proof-explanation question OP posts the proof then writes only "why? I don' understand <the proof>". Should specify more precisely what they do not understand. OP's prior two questions are similar.
@Jakobian So the asker, by clicking on the links in the blue box at the top of the question, will arrive at an answer to their question, yes?
Then it seems that dupe closure is appropriate...
2
@XanderHenderson is this an opinion based on the policies of this site?
If so then the closure is appropriate sure. Is deletion of the question appropriate then?
4:32 PM
@Jakobian You asked for other people's opinions, and specifically pinged me.
I gave you my opinion. I don't know what more you want.
@XanderHenderson yes. And I'm asking if its your personal opinion or opinion based on policies of this site
@Jakobian It if my opinion. If you want to understand what is "in line with the 'policies' of the site," you need to check meta.
That being said, it is my belief that this is entirely inline with the consensus on the site.
The search term you might start with is "abstract duplicates".
Alright. Thanks

6 hours later…
10:58 PM
D1, D2, D3