@MartinR Upon reflection, that answer isn't even quite right. I've posted an answer that addresses the flaw (though it may be a pedantic comment). I'm pretty sure that I am right regarding my argument about Möbius transformations, but I've had a couple of beers, so I might not be proofreading well. Please tell me if I am being an idiot (or rather, more of an idiot than usual).
@amWhy Oh, hey. I'm not the only one who is dissatisfied (though it took me longer to get there).
@MartinR @amWhy: It was technically wrong, as Xander has explained. That in conjunction with its brevity is perhaps why it was not felt to be acceptable.
@amWhy: Incidentally, that issue about short answers reminded me of the W answer, which I think was totally sufficient hahaha..
@XanderHenderson Sure. I wrote a comment, because this one does not deny the diagonal argument outright but asked "Is this a fault of my understanding of the naturals?"
@user21820 Thanks. I tried to read the question, but very rapidly got lost in the idiosyncratic notation. I looked a little cr*nky, but it seemed from the tone of the question that there was hope.
They are all making assumptions about the underlying domain and codomain which are not stated in the question (though some of those are addressed in comments that should be edited into the question).
Someone is angry with me today (or still angry with me) and I haven't a clue who it is, unless it's the return of one of a handful of phoenix bird users who plague this site! 10 downvotes today; surely, with that number in a short period of time, they'll be auto reversed.
@XanderHenderson I like it... Sort of "on-hold" until confirmed... That might help sabatage creators of new accounts, and it'd be more incentive for newerish users to earn sufficient rep (and keep it) to avoid the auto-hold.
this slows down the time between when a question is asked and when it is answered, which improves the likelihood that it will get beaten into good shape and then get a good answer
so, what are the obvious drawbacks that I'm not seeing?
I've heard of sites with a "triage"... I'm not sure if that's prior to the "first post review queue", or what. Those who want to answer everything asap are likely the biggest objectors, because it would prohibit their ability to answer immediately. Others might argue it's biased against new users. But I think when framed as you framed it, it's not a punishment, but rather, part of a process to ensure, that new users are more likely to have a successful experience(s) here.
And the big plus I see is precisely that being "first or second or third first time poster" loses it's charm for those who like the "spoon feeding" that is more apt to come with a first, second, third post from a "new user": i.e., those who simply create a new account each day and so don't worry about closures, downvotes, post bans, etc.
Plus, it might actually get the users who insist upon capping everyday (and so don't bother with site maintenance, reviews, etc), to take more interest in filtering, editing, improving, first questions (if or so they can answer them, of course), but nonetheless, gets them off their auto answer mode at least a few times in a day.
You've actually posed a very attractive approach to new users, @XanderHenderson!
It could probably tie in with privileges; and like badges for topics, the joint "<10 rep or <3 questions" condition ensures that one user's one lucky post (i.e., HNQ) which gets 15 upvotes, doesn't clear them quite yet; they'd need yet to meet the three posts requirement. But the details of course, can be worked out. It would be interesting to know if there is any precedence for such an approach on any of the SE sites?
@XanderHenderson I'd support it, certainly, and you can post a bare bones suggestion, or fill in possible details, in which case feel free to use anything I brainstormed on, without worry of "accreditation" hogwash!
@XanderHenderson I don't think this creates any real burden, either, on new users, because this hurdle can be met fairly easily, with just a little bit of investment on the part of the new user. What would be interesting is the question, once surpassed, (a user asks, say 3 questions and is at 15 rep (1 pt., one upvote on two separate questions, + 2 accepts), what happens if said user asks a fourth question with four downvotes, (four questions, down to 7 rep).
I'd like to see, in such a case, the restriction on posting (auto hold) reimposed. I think privelges are like that: (if one reps dips down below a threshold after having met the threshold, the privilege is lost).
@XanderHenderson Well done. Though I'd argue that the users wanting to answer everything they can aren't necessarily the professors here, as a good many of the "janitors" are professors, as well. I'd say we have newbies, students, farmers (whose crop is rep), janitors, and professors, and in most cases, none of the groups is entirely disjoint from the others! But, for simplicity's sake, and to spare the egos of rep-farmers, I'll resist any further qualifications! :-)
@XanderHenderson I totally understand. I was thinking more in terms of my own characterization of myself as "more than" a janitor.... But, I completely understand the strategy.
@Xander: @John Ma found a good post (link) about "triage" (see comment below your meta post). ... a similar practice which I believe may have had uptake on SO? Not sure on the site, but I think it's the only site on SE with more activity than MSE. Such a precedence, if it resembles what you're suggesting, would be a great bonus/asset to the idea you suggest, and its implementation!!
