Excuse me, why this question of mine is closed as off-topic?

And I hope that question can be reopened. :)

@Andrews If you look at the post's timeline, you'll see that it was closed just before your second edit, which provided much more context. That's not to say your original post wasn't on-topic, as IMO there was sufficient detail so it shouldn't have been closed in the first place anyway. Needs one more reopen vote.

It was closed(yesterday) after my second edit(2 days ago) actually, so I'm a little confused.

Thanks for reopening.

@Andrews It was before. Closed at 5:15 May 23 and edited (second) at 9:03 May 23

The revision shows I edited 2 days ago and it was closed yesterday.

@TheSimpliFire I see 05:04 May 25 as the timestamp for closure. math.stackexchange.com/posts/3236481/revisions math.stackexchange.com/posts/3236481/timeline

Ah, it might have taken a bit of time to get all five close-voters. From the review only three closed

However, it entered review queue on May 23: math.stackexchange.com/review/close/1204480 So some close votes have been cast sonner than that.

Well, anyway it's open now, thanks. And I fully understand why it's closed as "off-topic" at first. My original post miss many details and my question is a small part of a proof, so I don't want other parts distract much attention.

@Andrews That's great! Your last version is excellent. Usually the way to make the core question clear is to put it right at the top and separate it from your thoughts and background.

BTM, these links are invalid now...

@Andrews These links were created in the very early history of this chat-room so that people could use them to tag messages (not posts) according to the request. So they don't 'work' when you click on them. However, many current regulars in this room don't use them (it's too inconvenient).

Reopen Prove √2 is irational by contradiction? It is not the greatest question, but OP edited it and tried to explain the problem (replacing the original “blablabla” which understandably caused immediate down/close votes).

@MartinR Casted a vote. Though the post could do with some editing of capitals and question marks, and possibly a better title.

@MartinR @TheSimpliFire: I don't agree with reopening; the asker didn't even bother to make a sincere attempt; read the expanded 'blablabla' carefully, there is not only a typo but also a meaningless error.

C1, C2, C3.

C4, C5, C6.

D1, D2, D3.

D4, D5, D6.

D7, D8, D9.

D10, D11, D12.

D13, D14, D15.

Incorrect, very low quality accepted answer.

@user21820 Regarding C2: my bar for questions on notation is typically pretty low, but this one takes the cake.

That the question has attracted four answers, all of which basically say exactly the same thing, is depressing.

I'm tempted, in a comment, to ask "What about the set $\{\emptyset\}$? Is that the same as $\{\varnothing\}$"?

cv-pls trigonometry Missing context or other details Is it possible to solve for degree of $x$?‭ - Bobtrollsten‭ 2019-05-26 19:28:38Z