[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted user (70): Estimating Fourier spectrum from a graph - exam tomorrow... ✏️ by Coder on math.SE

HNQ duplicate

D1 D2 D3 D4 D5

For closure: c1, c2, c3, c4, c5, c6, c7

For deletion: d1, d2, d3

D1, D2, D3.

D4, D5, D6.

D7, D8, D9.

D10, D11, D12.

D13, D14, D15.

C1, C2, C3.

del-pls 20k+ I'm sorry to vote "look OK" on this (it's a mistake), could someone with 20K+ reputation help to delete it?

@YuiToCheng I think it's too long to be comments, so it should be flagged as NAA so that a moderator can move it. I only glanced through so I don't know whether the content is meaningful or not.

edit Why is $x_n=\cases{ 0,& \text{if } \pi_n=n\cr 1,& \text{otherwise} }.$ in this answer not rendered as expected. ("\text{ if} \pi" is displayed there instead of "if $\pi_n$...")

After change to "$x_n=\begin{cases} 0,& \text{if } \pi_n=n\cr 1,& \text{otherwise} \end{cases}.$" it seems to be correctly displayed in the preview. Here in chat - with robjohn's bookmarklet - both versions work.

@MartinSleziak The & symbols are the culprits.

Something like this: x_n=\cases{ 0, \,\,\text{if }\pi_n=n\cr 1, \,\,\text{otherwise} } could do

I have changed it to \begin{cases} .. \end{cases}. math.stackexchange.com/posts/87998/revisions Still, it is a bit strange that after copy-pasting the same thing here in chat it was rendered fine.

That works as well.

Perhaps robjohn used an improved version of MathJax or something?

psq math.stackexchange.com/q/3202996/29335

cv-pls calculus Unclear Piecewise Function First Derivative‭ - Peeves Peevsie‭ 2017-06-02 10:01:32Z

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword with email in answer, pattern-matching email in answer (184): Statistics Probability Lottery question chances by Frederick august on math.SE

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword with email in answer, pattern-matching email in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer, blacklisted user (255): Calculate lottery's second prize using combination - lottery probability question. by Frederick august on math.SE

cv-pls duality-theorems Unclear Am I have right answer about dual problem?‭ - 김종현‭ 2019-04-26 15:15:18Z

@BillDubuque Ah, so you decided to edit war, eh. I think the version I wrote more than adequately addresses the concerns you raised here (which I listened to), so it's hard to see why you would insist on your own original edit. As a matter of course I suppose I should ask you to explain how it fell short.

@rschwieb Please have the courtesy not to ping me any further on this matter. I have already explained my viewpoint above

Wrong answer.