CURED - 2016-07-24

« first day (1655 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (3135 days later) »

Martin Sleziak

06:17

On the space $c_0 = \{ \{x_n\}_{n=1}^\infty \in \ell^\infty : \lim_{n\to\infty} x_n = 0\}$ was closed as off-topic (missing context).

An Extreme Point of a closed ball of $\ell^\infty$ was closed as a duplicate of the above question. (Both were posted by the same OP.)

The newer question has at least some context (the OP at least written down the definition of extreme point). I would suggest to reopen the newer question and merge older one with the new question.

On the second thought, it is probably simpler to add the context to the older question. I did that and I suppose that this edit should push the question into reopen review queue.

(And I retracted my reopen vote on the newer question.)

No I didn't.

How do I retract reopen vote? I thought that it works the same as with close vote - simply by clicking on reopen again.

Retracting close votes is indeed possible: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/915/…

And there is this feature request: Ability to retract reopen/delete votes. So I suppose that at the moment it is not possible to retract a reopen vote.

We will see how the situation with those two questions will evolve.

And there exists also this question which contains the answer to the above questions: Extreme points of unit ball of Banach spaces $\ell_1$, $c_0$, $\ell_\infty$

However, post asking multiple questions at once are not ideal duplicate targets.

14 hours later…

quid

20:33

@MartinSleziak thank you for having written the introdcution for dupe closure; I made some modifications.

In particular I removed the statement "it is better" now I agree it is better, but some others might not yet at that point it is irrelevant. I kept the reference with it was decided.

Martin Sleziak

Thanks for the improvements.

What do you think about this?

2 days ago, by Martin Sleziak

For example, should a suggestion to change direction (duplicate target) be included as a possible post in that thread?

quid

I had not see that. Yes, I was thinking about this too.

It seems a natural place to discuss this, but in practice it is best handled by a mod.

Martin Sleziak

To be honest, I am not sure whether score 4 (+5/-1) is sufficient support to start the thread. And whether it is worth starting possible close/reopen war.

But making a draft for the post probably does not hurt anybody.

quid

The majority is clear enough. Most users just could not care less. Thus hardly anybody votes.

Martin Sleziak

One funny thing about that thread is that I have already made two posts simply because somebody said that such answer should be posted (instead of posting the answer himself). This would be a third one:

@quid: I'd do it, but then I'd be blamed in stealing yet another "requests thread" from someone. Might as well let Martin do it... :P — Asaf Karagila Jul 18 at 23:44

As I said, I'd be quite satisfied if somebody else starts the thread.

quid

20:44

I could also post it, no problem.

Martin Sleziak

"you should have cast already" or "you should already have cast"?

I am not native speaker, so even if somethings does not sound right to me, it still might be correct.

quid

Neither am I... what do the experts say:

Q: What is the correct word order between "have/had", "been", and "already" in statements?

What is the correct word order between have/had, been, and already in statements like the following: By the time the product was officially announced, I had already been using it. Or: By the time the product was officially announced, I had been already using it. Or: By the time th...