@user21820 Personally, the problem with this way is that my Firefox gets unbearably slow after opening 8+ tabs. But generally, it somewhat wastes one's time and energy to click a request only to find that it has been dealt with. That's why I was thinking to show such information without clicking links.
Since you've mentioned the SE API, I'll read its docs to see if there's some workaround to get the status of posts.
I have the following system, and I want to find $x, y$ and $z$
$$\left\{\begin{array}{c}
|x-y|=\frac{7}{3}\\
|y-z|=\frac{7}{3}\\
|x-z|=\frac{28}{3}
\end{array}\right.$$
I don’t know how to do this, can anyone please help, I was just randomly trying some values and it was not working out, please h...
@Saad If you read up in the transcript, you will note that there are already existing user scripts which make it possible to see the status of posts in chat.
For example:
On the right, "c:(2)" tells you that the post currently has two close votes; "cld d:(1)" tells you that the post is closed and has one delete vote.
@XanderHenderson Then what is left to be done is to show all recent requests in one place as @user21820 said, but now it seems to be a fine-tuning job that will never be done :P
@BillDubuque The SE API provides no information for posts that are deleted. Once the post is deleted, the only way the script could obtain the information would be to fetch data from the individual question pages and the scrape information from that. However, SE specifically has stated that they don't want scripts to do that. If the user is actually looking at a page, scraping that page is fine, but fetching pages just to scrape them isn't. It's possible to do, just not permitted.
Not updating when not actually viewed was added over initial concerns of possibly making too many requests. However, testing has indicated that updating all the time should not actually increase the number of requests all that much. Increasing the number of requests should only be a problem if you're keeping multiple tabs open with the chat page, or opening a large number of transcript/user/search pages, or if you use other scripts which use a large number of requests.
@BillDubuque I've added a note to have updating while the tab is not viewed as an option in the next version. If you want to modify the script, it's easy to do. To do so, comment out this line and not the next line, but the line below that which contains only }. Do not comment out the single line between those two.
@Saad I'm actually surprised that your browser has a problem with 8+ tabs. I usually have 80+ open and my browser (a firefox derivative) doesn't slow down at all when I open 20 more tabs within 20 seconds. Has your browser always been slow in opening new tabs or is it a recent issue?
Waterfox and Palemoon both seem to work fine in opening multiple tabs in rapid succession. I'm on Windows 7 with Intel Core i5 and 4GB ram, if that is relevant.
But I definitely agree it does consume time to check and find that a request has already been handled.
That's why I ended up using shortcut keys and mouse tricks to do it fast.
@Saad Not the tabs. I still cycle through the tabs as I described above. But if you want I can write you a script to change the tab title to insert the status at the front. Then you don't even have to click on the tab to know the status.
@XanderHenderson This would not be a terribly high priority closure for me, given the volume of blatant PSQs. The asker seems to state the problem sufficiently, and shows their thinking. Granted, the post could be improved, but there are far worse posts in need of closure than this one, IMHO.
^^^ That the user was wrong in their calculation should not, in itself, merit closure.
@amWhy I have no quibble with your priorities, but my close-reasoning is not simply that the asker was wrong in their computation. Rather, per my comment: "Can you also please provide a source for this problem, as well as any other relevant details about the context in which this problem was presented? I could see this as a contest problem (for which one type of answer might be expected), or as a problem in a combinatorics course (for which another type of answer might be appropriate)."
@XanderHenderson But you are quibbling, in fact. Among the 370-some posts waiting in the review queue for closure votes, are you going to argue that the post you posted with a close request is worse than 10 percent of the questions awaiting closure?
@amWhy I'm not quibbling with your priorities. I'm quibbling with your assertion that the close reason was "incorrect computation".
That is, I have no interest in trying to convince you that the question should be a priority, but I did want to set the record straight regarding the reason for the close vote.
I'm sorry if that's how I came across, @Xander. As I said, I had not read the explanation in your comment; I read only the question. Your comment makes a lot of sense. And I would very, very much like to have more votes so that we could all effectively address all questions worthy of closure. But thanks for explaining your comment, but you are right, you reason for requesting closure had nothing to do with the correctness of the asker's work.
My primary concern with that question was that it had already attracted one low-quality answer, and I was worried about more similar answers coming in.
The inaccurate picture is also problematic, I think, but I think that the intended meaning is clear.
In any event, that particular question is not a high priority for me, either, and the horse has kind of left the barn at this point.
If $a > b \geq 2$, where $a, b$ are integers, what is the lower bound of $b - \frac{b}{a}$?
Prove directly that if an STS(v) and STS(w) exist, then an STS(vw) exists.
I don't how to show it directly but i can show it with theorems
