@Holo and possibly more?

Didn't even thought to check...

please do be aware that some of the higher-ups dropped in a few months ago to tell us that we were not being nice here in CRUDE, and that one of the problems was the perceived targeting of users, rather than content

it was implied that linking to user profiles is poor form, and might be frowned upon

@SimplyBeautifulArt @Holo

understandable

@XanderHenderson what about ice cream?

I think ice cream is okay

What about.... donut flavoured ice cream!?

Still a donut

I was just going to suggest that this ice cream might not be okay.

oof

I disagree! It still had donut in the title

Call the higher up for this

Coffee flavoured ice cream is pretty good tho

The coffee seems nice, yes

I have to go now

bye

cya

Also @XanderHenderson Thanks for pointing out, bye

While I entirely agree with this comment, I felt that I had to flag it as "unkind". MSE popped up a little bit of text apologizing for the fact that I was exposed to such a terrible comment. I would much prefer a simpler "Your flag has been recorded" comment. :\

This question should be closed. I don't understand how it managed to survive closure in the past. :\

I don't think that this edit should have been approved.

Is it reasonable to rollback?

I rolled it back, then made some other edits. You can ignore me now.

@XanderHenderson This on the same thread is objectively not an answer. Delete? @amWhy @MikePierce

One more vote needed here.

This question is interesting, sadly it is PSQ

@AsafKaragila Ugh... I shouldn't have taken the bait. I left a comment, and now have email. :\

@XanderHenderson You can just tell him not to email you again, or ignore it entirely.

As far as annoying internet personalities, he's somewhat mild.

@AsafKaragila In what role do undergrads meet the scholar in question?

@MichaelGreinecker Going on math forums to talk to other students.

I guess not as often nowadays...

@AsafKaragila An eternal student?

@MichaelGreinecker Who?

@AsafKaragila DS

@MichaelGreinecker I don't know. Never met him in real life. But he hangs/hanged out in public Israeli forums about science, math, and so on.

Ic. Maybe he can get a position in Augsburg. He seems to share a research interest in the complete binary tree...

@AsafKaragila Oh, I am ignoring it entirely. It is just a bit annoying.

@XanderHenderson Yeah, it is.

Please review the following/ cast votes when you see fit:

1, 2‌​, 3, 4

5, 6, 7, 8

9, 10, 11, 12

13, 14, 15, 16

17, 18, 19, 20

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Potentially bad ns for domain in answer: Oppermann's conjecture by Tetramur on math.SE

@user21820, @XanderHenderson, @Did, @SimplyBeautifulArt, @TheSimpliFire, @MikePierce, @Holo, and @all-interested0users , here, if interested in following meta and users' references to CRUDE, please see this meta post. I'll let each one here to decide for themselves the merit of the post.

This is a very old PSQ, that never got closed, received 7 upvotes and over 10,000 views.

Beyond me.

@amWhy I saw that yesterday. I rather appreciate Jyrki Lahtonen's level-headedness.

He was a good mod. :(

@Holo I would recommend giving OP a chance to respond to comments before closing that f(f(x))=ln(x) one. It might have an interesting answer, and it would be a shame to lose it when the OP can easily add some motivation to the question.

@amWhy I will look at it when I will have more time

@XanderHenderson Oops, then I'm a bit behind in monitoring meta!!! Yes, I think Jyrki's answer is quite fitting.

@MikePierce I don't know... I kind of thing that the right process is Close -> Comment -> Clarify -> C-reopen.

@MikePierce Okay, I agree

Also, I feel it is unfair that the bot can post specific users and we were told not to :P

Closure is just a means of slowing down the accumulation of bad answers which may ultimately prove to be useless (if, for example, the question is edited to make the answers irrelevant).

@Holo The bot is picking out posts, not users. It just happens to not the name of the user who posts.

Basically, I think that we should be fast to close, but also fast to reopen (if a post merits it), and slow to downvote.

@MikePierce I have provided the final close vote. A quick glance at their profile shows that they were active 7 hours ago, and I think 3 hours is more than enough time to respond.

@TheSimpliFire It need one more vote to close it

I wonder how many OPs, especially ones new to the site, edit their question after it's closed. Like, I'd imagine most folks who ask such a question see their post get put on-hold or closed and think that's the end.

It is a shame because it really could have been interesting question

If a post of poor quality is downvoted, @XanderHenderson, and later edited and improved by the OP, just as it is possible to reopen, it also becomes possible to un-downvote, perhaps even upvote. So I don't understand your distinction between downvote/close vote; both are reversible if and when the asker edits the post.

When a closed question is being edit does it appear on the main page?

@amWhy Reversing a downvote requires the person who cast the downvote to remember to come back and check in. Closing a question does not have that requirement.

@MikePierce That is an issue, but I don't know what to do about it. The close message already indicates that the question needs to be improved, which does suggest that it can be reopened eventually.

:46274699, @XanderHenderson. Well, this is clearly the responsibility of the asker, that despite the message every asker gets when their question is put on hold, they don't bother to read information supplied before their very eyes. Please don't suggest that, we should include audio: "Please edit to improve your post, given that it was found to be ............", plus an autogenerated message sent to their inbox, for yet a third reminder?

And on top of that, add strobe lights, and tactile stimulation to try to help an asker to help themselves.

@amWhy That's kind of what I just said. It is a problem that new users don't understand that closure just means "Fix this" and isn't the end. However, there is not much that can be done about that. The close message already indicates that the question needs to be improved, which does suggest that it can be reopened eventually.

@XanderHenderson Indeed. Sorry. I had started a response to Mike's comment, that you also (earlier) commented on. Apologies for not following along, prior to posting my comment (I had just become absorbed in replying.

:)

@everyone Please share your thoughts on this question that @amWhy and myself voted to close (especially the comments sections on both question and answer)

@SimplyBeautifulArt Oi... For the record, I think that all such questions should be closed as duplicates of this one.

I went looking for such an abstract duplicate yesterday when I voted to close another similar question.

@amWhy Don't forget a post card in the mail a week later too. ;) I've never thought about it before now, but I really dislike the design of the put on hold message box.

@MikePierce Hehehe; No, I agree about the design, I think the design of the "put on hold" message box ought to contrast the typical highlighting/colors on the site, even if it sticks out like a sore thumb.

@TheSimpliFire I agree with @amWhy new comment on the post "All a user has to do is say: problemstatementcopiedfromassignedexercise, followed by: "I don't understand the steps to get the answer to this", and thought ought to count as a good question? I suggest it is you, as much as the asker, that needs to read up on the help section's FAQ's on "Asking"."

and someone voted to reopen?

Apparently

@TheSimpliFire Unfortunately, some people cast votes merely to defy other users expressing concern about the (lack of) quality of a question, and not on the merits of the question.

@TheSimpliFire. I did. I'd prefer it be closed as a duplicate of this one that Xander posted

I think instead of reopen and then reclose as duplicate flag a moderator will be better in this case

@MikePierce You reopen it, and it'll likely never get closed again as a dupe. I'm all for closing good questions that are a duplicate of another good question. But if the question deserves deletion for other reasons, it should be closed for other reasons.

I never think to flag a mod. :P Wouldn't they say that marking as duplicate should happen democratically though? Also, doesn't anyone here have a gold-badge in [algebra-precalculus] and can close as dup unilaterally?

Usually, but I don't know how does it works when the question is already closed

@MikePierce Yeah, but it hasn't been reopened; and I maintain it has been closed for correct reason. And furthermore, any question closed as a dupe in a tag (dupe hammered or not) can be reopened by anyone with a gold badge in the same tag. And since I've already voted to close it, I cannot vote to close again under a new reason. (

@amWhy I respectfully disagree with you on the quality of the question. I think it's just good enough to live on the site. Like, it's basic and it's not a good question (who would favorite it!?) but it's not a straight-up PSQ (at least anymore? I haven't looked at edits). And that sucks that you can't close-as-dup something you've already voted to close. Closing as a duplicate seems more about organization than about actually closing.

@MikePierce I do not equate "good" = "should be favorited". Check out meta to read "How to ask a good question", custom made for this site.

I hate to disagree with you and your sexy beard, @MikePierce, but I think that John Ma summed it up really well:

> If the OP described how they come up with that 1 and −1 by showing a bit of calculations, then it would becomes a great questions since their mistakes might be common. As of now, I don't see why this whole post is worth keeping.

You butter me up talking about my beard. :D But why not keep it? The question isn't taking up any space. And I don't think it's setting a poor precedent like the PSQs we close/delete. It's just another post about solving non(easily)-factorable quadratics. Like, my ideal here is that this should point to that one BIG question you linked to, and it serves as a valuable sign-post to future users of the site with the same problem (who find this post first by searching Google).

Old topic, before I forget: Is there someone to appropriately complain to about the layout of the put-on-hold box? Or is that some standardized SE-Network-wide thing that probably will never change?

@MikePierce You could ask that very question on meta: like, [discussion],[feature request], and you'll likely learn relatively quickly whether a redesign is possible. I wouldn't cross my fingers, but it would help clear up the question, one way or another.

@amWhy Thanks. :) I've made a note, and I'll ask it later when I've got time to be attentive to a post. Gotta leave for today though

@MikePierce C'ya

@XanderHenderson I got an email now, too.

@AsafKaragila Wow! How lucky you must feel! :P

@AsafKaragila Lucky you!

I've gotten two of them now.

AND have a new entry in my blacklist!

@XanderHenderson Yikes... Makes me want to think twice about adding my email to my profile; I've been toying with the idea, but, ....

Yar, I probably shouldn't be as public as I am about my contact information, but I do have a lot of email addresses, so, meh.

Are there some comments that have been deleted here?

@XanderHenderson I don't know; I don't think any of my comments have been deleted, certainly not below the question or answer.

Okay... maybe I am just not following the conversation

Hrm... I can't retract a flag on a comment.

That's annonying

@XanderHenderson Not on comments? I thought flags were always retractable, if retracted early enough. I was referring to a previous comment made by the previous comment from the answerer, and suggest they pay attention to the Code of Conduct. Their response to me was along the lines of "I know I am, but so are you. So there."

Yeah, me too.

But I can't seem to retract the flag.

Yes, the comment you flagged seems to have been deleted. Now the answerer's most recent flag seems to need a flag.

No, the comment is still there.

Or maybe there is a cache clearing problem on my end...?

No, it is still there

And now there is this comment. That whole question has become toxic. :\

The question I was responding to, when I mention CoC was deleted. Perhaps you mean a different comment. I did flag their last comment.

I did, too!

But I dropped another flag on the other thread, because I was confused about who was replying to what.

But then I got is sorted, and would like to retract that flag and cannot.

@XanderHenderson All the more reason it should get a mod's attention.

@amWhy Just read the post by Jyrki Lahtonen here, very nice. Thank you for linking it

Yeah, I poked the math mod office.

Hopefully, someone will do something.

@Holo My pleasure!

@amWhy @Holo Could I get someone to flag my comment here, then try to retract it?

@XanderHenderson Do you want me to flag your question, or vote to close...

Flag the comment, then see if you can unflag it.

Can't unflag

You deleted the comment?

No, I did not delete the comment.

@XanderHenderson I flagged it, and the comment immediately disappeared. Maybe Holo and I brought a mod who deleted it.

Perhaps the flag invoked deletion?

But the mod should have saw that it is a test no?

That would be somewhat ironic.

But I suspect flags on comments are unretractable.

I thought that they could be retracted in the past...

@amWhy No, you cast the third flag on it, and three flags is enough to make a comment go (unless it was upvoted, then more may be needed; also, I'm not sure about "other" flags, but the canned reasons all contribute).

It seems that I am a crazy person, and it was never possible to retract comment flags.

Though how John Ma found that topic so quickly amazes me.

:O

I looked. :\

@DanielFischer Okay... I thought I was second after Holo. Thanks for the explanation.

I would have been funnier if it was a mod...

@amWhy The flagging wasn't coordinated well enough. Someone flagged in between.

@XanderHenderson Well, I was afraid to tell you as much; but I'm glad you came to the self-realization about your "craziness" :P

@XanderHenderson maybe John Ma remembered it from the past so they could find it easily

@DanielFischer What flagging? On what comment? below what question? :P

@amWhy in @XanderHenderson post, there was a "third side party" (John Ma) that flag the comment so it automatically got deleted

WHOOSH

(that is the sound a bad joke makes when it goes sailing over someone's head) :P

I am not very good with jokes...

@amWhy You can't fool me. You have enough rep to still see the deleted post. You know exactly where.

@DanielFischer You got me! :P

@Holo I was talking about the question, itself, not the comment, though I'm guessing my feeble joke when WHOOSH

Sorry for "getting WHOOSH"ed(perfect english)

@Holo Actually, my joke was poor, so it probably sounded like KURPLUNK, the sound of a poor joke taking a dive.

From all sounds it is KURPLUNK?

Not an answer.

@XanderHenderson It's deletable. I cast the delete vote already there.

I flagged, but don't have the XP to delete

Delete answers is 20k right?

@Holo Yes, that's right.

Better go answer some PSQs!

@XanderHenderson oops, sorry, yeah. But the flag I think allows you to recommend deletion? That can be very helpful too.

Yeah, I can flag things, which sends them to the review queue.

If you flag is there meaning to another flag?

Yes!

more flags = faster action

Sure, flagged

Oh goodness.

@SimplyBeautifulArt That one is just for you!

Oh wow

@user21820 You'll probably enjoy it, too!

I am reading the link in the post and apparently "There are no gaps between numbers, but there are no adjacent numbers either" is erosion of mathematical!

:/ maybe they mistook ordinals for cardinals

I think they tried to extend the diagonalization argument to uncountable cases

Without completely understanding what infinity is

Can I edit this question math.stackexchange.com/questions/1930915/… and change the first pharagraph ?

With this question: The function $f(z)=\displaystyle\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}z^n$ is expanded into a Taylor series in the neighborhood of the point $z=a(|a|<1).$ For what values of $a$ does this expansion permit the function $f(z)$ to be continued analytically?

I'm not sure that I see what changes you are proposing to make...?