@user170039 That question is asked over and over and over again on this site. I get the impression that the question to which you have linked was settled upon as the ur-question to which to link all other copies of that question.
@PeterSheldrick That, or it's the same user with two different accounts. I closed the more recent question as a duplicate of the older question. Thanks for noticing!
@ProfessorVector I wouldn't say that what your claiming is necessarily true. Not at all. People have to many preconceived notions about what "should be the case", always. That's rather puritanical, and doesn't match how SE has been designed.
How can you say no to a poor question begging for its deletion? They have their rights too, no?
Any way, @ProfessorVector, my dv was cast long before @SimplyBeautifulArt's post. The sight is designed so that upon receiving a net -3 score, it is valid to delete it. If I think a question is poor (no effort, no context, no research), as in this case, I dv and likely vote to close. If two others feel likewise, or enough users downvote so that there is a net -3 score, according to the SE designed network, at play on every site in SE, the time is ripe for deletion, if three users agree.
@amWhy Of course, you have a right to downvote a poor question (and it is, I don't have to be a specialist in logic for that), it's also asked quite often, lots of duplicates.
@SimplyBeautifulArt the first of the two questions immediately above, is the question you alerted us to, which at the time was in need of delete votes. It's now open for deletion.
I'm told by smart people that
$$0.999999999\dots=1$$
and I believe them, but is there a proof that explains why this is?
