@amWhy: this is to be expected when one posts an easy/routine PSQ. In fact such questions could have been answered by the asker themselves had they been not that lazy.

this one came in review queue. Should be deleted. Wonder if we start getting content of xkcd also.

I suggest to close this "find a formula for a sequence" question math.stackexchange.com/q/4053339/42969. Without context this amounts to pure guessing.

C/D , there is a long way even to a closure

C/D

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted user (71): Numerical integration of samples of a function by velenos14 on math.SE

@Peter : please flag the comment for moderator action. Especially if this behavior is repeated.

@Peter Please focus on content, not users. If a user is behaving badly, please us flags to call it to the attention of the moderators.

@ParamanandSingh I have flagged it

@Peter You are specifically calling for moderators to take action towards a specific user. Statements like "Moderators should take a watchful eye on this user!" focus on the user, not the content of the user's questions, answers, or comments. If you believe that a user is problematic, use flags. Otherwise, focus on content.

sweet jimminy, the comments here: math.stackexchange.com/q/4045361/137524

i don't consider them to be untoward at all---they all seem on topic---but that is a lot of comments

@MartinR I would like to hear your opinion. Should all users and not only the moderators be informed abouth particular bad events ? If not, why ?

→ 1 message moved to ­Trash

→ 1 message moved to ­Trash

C/D

D

C/D

Such vague questions keep to get upvotes and answers (also upvoted) :(

D

@Peter : I think the point which @XanderHenderson mentioned is that one can discuss about behaviors / posts in chats (in particular in this room) which might lead to closure / deletion of content. But any suggestion of taking any action against some user has to be done by flags. I don't think this in any way implies that we can't inform about bad events.

Rude user here I am surprised he/she has been on the site for over a year. Oh , hello all!

@Semiclassical I know that OP, he/she is quite open with comments. Have seen the general contributions of that OP, but on his/her questions there's like three or four them in a group (you can probably try to identify the other users), they attempt each other's questions and post them too. I was there as well, I had a minor chat with Will Jagy who sent me a nice post of his.

right

it's not unproductive but it does tend to make the question hard to follow for any outside observer

@Semiclassical Yes, that is true. But thankfully I have spoken to this OP before, he/she even came to me earlier asking me to see one of his/her questions, and to see if it met the standards of the site. Good person by the looks of it.

I can talk to them and tell them to keep the comments low, however.

Upvoted PSQ with multiple upvoted answers

PSQ2

Actually, part of the reason why new users appear rude, is because those who usually post first replies are rude. For example, seeing here I find the first comment really rude and sarcastic. Even in the post I attached earlier, there was a comment that could be perceived as being unfriendly, although the OP reacted worse. The first comment has to be polite at any cost.

@TeresaLisbon Not an excuse, but that's probably because the people making the first replies become frustrated after seeing the same homework type questions appearing on the front page day after day 😅

@DevashsihKaushik Unfortunately that is true. But that is what we have to be : stubbornly polite. I have had enough run-ins with people who have not posted bad questions but are put off by bad and sarcastic replies such as that which I attached. We simply have to be kinder I think. For example, the first question I attached was not terrible, although worthy of closure. The response was pathetic. I'd be shattered if I was OP.

We have to maintain politeness. It is not easy, amidst the flurry of bad questions, but I personally think it is better to start off on a positive note and bring the conversation forward. At least that is more inviting to OP than being rude and immediately crushing the prospect of any learning for the OP from his/her mistake. That kind of behaviour just creates more irrational hatred and animosity on the site.

I have been on the end of some invectives myself, even when I've been quite polite. But I find that number to be far smaller than some others on the site, and I've had quite a few success stories with some posters simply because I started out politely.

@TeresaLisbon: well said. If one is not in a mood to post a polite but instructive comment (even a constructive criticism) then one is better off giving a silent close/down vote.

@ParamanandSingh So true , right! See, I'm not saying I have never been rude myself , but I've learned the lesson and profited from learning it, and now I don't generally get into issues, in fact relationships are quite positive here for me.

@TeresaLisbon: but there are also scenarios where politeness is often met with hostility from other side and many veterans here may have faced that. So there is little incentive for being polite.

@ParamanandSingh I will keep politeness as my first priority, and will back away or flag if the conversation turns vitriolic. If met with hostility, then you can always back away. I flagged OP's comments on the post I attached, but I went to his/her history and found no signs of rudeness elsewhere, even kind words like Sir were used by OP elsewhere. I think the OP felt here that we were ridiculing him/her by pointing out the tag issue.

What followed was poor from OP, but the start of it was from the tag issue, which if it had been raised after the discussion, would have resulted in the OP actually accepting his/her fault and possibly being aware next time.

There was an answer in suggested edits queue and the edit replaced "OP" (a reference to asker/original poster) with "you". I don't know if there is any practice or guideline regarding this. I rejected the edit as "no improvement".

Hello everyone!! Hoping to catch @Xander, but I'd appreciate everyone's input. The most recent question on meta complains about the deletion of two of the OPs answers, due to deletion of two questions. I voted to close as a dupe of "Request for reopen and undelete votes". I'm just sick of eveyone who has a question closed, or an answer closed, cluttering meta, when they already have recourse through the duplicate I chose.

Unfortunately some answerers swarm in to answer very poor questions as if they are flies drawn to poop!

@amWhy True. Besides, reuns is a good contributor in general , but I am surprised that nobody leaves comments before answering. reuns answered my question once, but only after we exchanged seven to eight comments , although my question had enough context. Unless the question has enough context people must comment and prompt OP to provide it, and that did not happen. You can put that as a reason.

@TeresaLisbon Indeed. I meant my last comment as an aside regarding the previous conversation on preceding my comment here. reuns is overall a good contributor, but I think there are problems when one makes exceptions for "more elevated topics" even if PSQs. math.se has, from the beginning, welcomed participation from in all levels of math. I'm rather egalitarian in opposting PSQs.

@TeresaLisbon I agree.

@amWhy It is correct to be egalitarian. The truth is, everybody simply has to ask for more context in the comments. For example, the other answer in reuns' first post contained terms which require clarification. I know it helped five people, apparently, but we don't even know if OP understood it. There was no feedback from OP's side as well.

There is yet another discussion on meta that they disagree with deletion of some questions. In most such cases it is always the answerers who take up the issue. Why do the askers never care about deletion of their posts?

This dichotomy really strikes me as odd

Same question I posted about above: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/57274780#57274780. But your observation is spot on. And rarely do such answerers fell up that one reason they're upset is the loss of rep from answers due to the deletion of the question

@amWhy: I did not read past message which show that you have already put the matter in this room. Sorry, one should try to read past messages before posting one's own (or at least do it as often as possible)

@ParamanandSingh No matter! I just thought yet another such post, since the one I posted about, made it on meta! No worries. Your commentary was worth posting, about why predominantly answerers post with complaints about deletion, and not askers.

@ParamanandSingh It might be a matter of rep. A lot of the time, there are very poor questions which very quickly receive a few answers with 2-3 upvotes even if the queston itself have -ve votes.

@ParamanandSingh I think it is mainly about the reputation loss, but I also think that askers are usually more temporary players on the site, and don't care about reputation (and site quality) as much as answerers. Most people who have high rep on the site are prolific answerers and more people with low rep and less activity are questioners. Those people also know that they can ask the same question again if it's closed, while the answerer may not see that post again to gain back rep.

If a user is used to giving such answers and disagree with the PSQ policy, it is understandable why they might end up with such meta posts

@TeresaLisbon I actually used to try giving individual feedback, but it gets exhausting really fast. Nowadays, I tend to give a silent downvote and flag and put up a template message. Patience is much easier when you only try to talk things out with OP's who respond constructively.

@DevashsihKaushik Very true. I think I will reach my nadir sometime and revert to your tactic. For now I have the patience so I keep going. Also, seeing some of my success stories asking better questions on the site and improving steadily only improves my resolve. The consistently bad users, I think the site sorts them out, and your contribution in this regard is appreciated!

Also, your name is spelt wrong in the username? @DevashsihKaushik Just asking, I am used to Devashish as a more common name. I am sorry if that is the actual spelling.

@TeresaLisbon Its actually pretty nice that there are people like you who still have the enthusiasm to keep engaging with new users. I've noticed that older users tend to get more and more jaded:(

@DevashsihKaushik Who, me? ;D

Like in the comment here. I remember that Jose used to hang around here when this room was CRUDE, and he had the same tactic that I do now...and now...

@amWhy :P

@TeresaLisbon Yeah you're right. I intentionally put it that way a while back and never corrected it

@DevashsihKaushik Yes, very true, I do notice that the habit is rare. I just wish to keep it because of the success I've had with it. I invite people to my chatroom liberally to discuss things if I find that they are dismayed with things. But not if they are rude, that I don't allow under any circumstances. We have seen Jose's spectacular response in that post, and while I admire it I can't be like that, unfortunately.

@TeresaLisbon it takes all kinds to make a world - or in this case, a site

@DevashsihKaushik True, but the problem is that sometimes if the boat has to move in a certain direction then everybody needs to row in that direction. I wish to make the site more polite, user friendly and personal, but that also means allowing people to express themselves within site boundaries. I just felt that experienced users (like the one in a post I attached earlier) should use wisdom to reply and not be snide. I think everybody should row this particular issue in the right direction.

For example, Jose's comment, as much as it is born out of frustration, is out of place in hindsight. As much as we try to defend it, leaving a polite comment could possibly have engaged OP, an OP who will now possibly be venting that frustration in front of his/her peers.

Of course it can backfire, and the OP can say "answer my question or get out" and be rude and what not, but if we get things right from our side , only then can we complain about what comes from the other side.

That's why although I mentioned in this post that the OP was rude, we can't complain because our comments prior to the outburst were perceivably rude. We could have addressed the question and then the tag issue, which was not done, leading to the entire situation. We should close this question, though.

Keep an eye on this "currently deleted" question; it's got two undelete votes, so let's be prepared to redelete it.

@amWhy I think you haven't given the link. But yes, ready for action.

math.stackexchange.com/questions/4043247/… and math.stackexchange.com/questions/3944941/…

Thanks, @Teresa... silly li'l ole me!!

@amWhy Oh the reuns ones, yes will keep an eye out. That meta question now has as many up votes as downvotes, earlier it was slightly downvoted.

@TeresaLisbon I know; they have "buddies", like the comic Some Guy"

@amWhy, @TeresaLisbon: I really have great respect for reuns and also envy their knowledge of elliptic function theory and algebraic number theory, but I don't really know what to say. They are asking reviewers to add context in PSQs. Why don't we put all this burden on asker?

@ParamanandSingh Reviewers are few and far between! So we can't reach every incomplete question and ask for context. The answerers, however, are not few and far between : when they see a question, they should know whether it has enough context or not for answering, and how it can be improved. That's why there's more onus on reuns than us to seek to improve that question. reuns knows how to prompt the user more precisely, we can only throw around general terminology.

How can reviewers add context on PSQs? If I had to request context on a question in model theory I'd be clueless, whereas a person who wants to answer that question would know better. That is why the answerer bears greater responsibility on improving the question!

@ParamanandSingh Or the answerer? This site is not meant to clean up after sloppy questions and irresponsible answerers of sloppy questions. That expectation they expressed seems rather arrogant to me. Very few of us on this site spend a lot of our time doing "janitor" work and reviewing, to the point it limits our ability to spend all that time we could otherwise spend answering questions. Granted, we have chosen that. But the beneficiaries of that work seem clueless, and expectant,

...as the user you mention, @paramanand, expects from "others than themselves". That greatly annoys me.

@Peter The philosophy behind moderation on the SE network is that past actions should not be held against a user. If a user has a bad day (or week, or month, or whatever), the moderators can deal with it, the user "serves their time", and all is forgiven.

We are not supposed to hold grudges, nor publicly call out or shame users.

@TeresaLisbon Isn't it frowned upon for editors to put in new things into an OP. We are changing the question for all intents and purposes by putting our own assumptions into the it.

It is perfectly find to call out specific comments in public (as these are likely to be deleted), or to point out specific problematic posts. When you ask moderators to "keep an eye on a user", however, you are crossing a line. Please, always keep in mind that the focus should be on the content, and not on who wrote the content.

@amWhy I see that you pinged me---give me a minute to catch up. I have a meeting in 10 minutes, but if I can get caught up, I'll reply (otherwise, I'll be back in an hour to follow up).

@XanderHenderson Take the time you need.

@DevashsihKaushik Yes, it is frowned upon , it is an infringement. That's why I request people to comment , requesting OP to edit, or taking permission of OP before editing. I actually edited a question once without taking permission of OP, and eventually reverted when I realized I had misconstrued the intentions of OP. But answerers of that question should consider it a higher priority to prompt the user for context, than us.

Signing off for tonight! Bye!!

@amWhy I don't have time to engage with this in detail right now, but I agree that this should have been brought up in the Reopen Request Thread, and have dupe-hammered it as such.

Delete math.stackexchange.com/questions/4043247/…, before you go, @Paramand.

See my pinned post on the right, @TeresaLisbon The first of the two I linked was undeleted.

@amWhy Noticed, put the delete vote.

@XanderHenderson Thanks Xander! Also, Thanks, @Teresa!

@amWhy But a small point : what if we now prompt OP for context and he/she edits? My point is, it is reopened so can we give OP a last chance saloon?

@TeresaLisbon I would do so if the "complainant" reuns prompted the OP to improve the question. Their main interest seems clearly only keeping their 50 rep.

@amWhy Hi ! Do you agree Xander ? I just would like to have a second opinion.

@amWhy Prompted reuns. Let's see what happens.

@Peter Were you asking if Xander agrees with you? Because it seems like you are addressing Xander in the comment you pinged to me.

No, I would like to know if you have the same opinion how to deal with rude or even insulting posts.

I guess @Paramanand left before reading my comment. Getting late, his time I imagine.

@Peter flag the posts/comments. Mods keep track of repeated flags against users, and take action when there is a pattern. And likely take action immediately if there is a particularly egregious, unacceptable post.

Be cautious, @Teresa. The OP is most likely because two users jumped in to do their work for them. They could likely care less if the question is deleted. Heck, after all, they got two answers.

I have already informed reuns, @amWhy that the question will be closed if he/she doesn't react and force the OP to say something. The clock is ticking, and the ball is in reuns' court.

As far as I can see, the OP cares not, but reuns does. So the onus is on reuns to work this out.

@TeresaLisbon It's already closed, and in the process of reopening.

@amWhy reuns has edited the question.

As long as reuns does not ask a question that wasn't asked. One cannot make up context as though the asker wrote the questions. If they want to repost a similar but better question, and then answer it, fine.

@amWhy To be fair, all reuns did was provide definitions. If they don't match with those of the OP (very unlikely to be honest) then we have an issue, else I don't see a problem.

Also, if you have not seen this question do try to close it, I have flagged OP's comments for rude behaviour.

Which put words in the mouth of the asker: compare math.stackexchange.com/posts/4043247/revisions

@TeresaLisbon If you're okay letting an answerer pretend he answered a mediocre question that was written by the OP named on the question, go for it. To me it's playing games to preserve ones rep.

@amWhy No, you are right on this one, reuns has in fact infringed on the post to preserve his/her rep. Absolutely, it is clear from the edits that this is the case. I will not respond on that thread anymore, unless it is a matter of closure/deletion of one of those questions.

Or if the OP him/herself has something to say on those edits.

Anyway, good (insert your time zone here) to all, that's all for the day from the queen of the sweetscape with pink butterflies and purple roses.

@TeresaLisbon Take care. No problem,

@ParamanandSingh You should probably be sleeping right now! ;D

Though I tend to rise about 4:00 a.m my time. Thanks to my loud cat who meows persistently next to my face when he wants to get up!*

@amWhy: sleep disturbed by my kid! I can't believe that the question being highlited by reuns in meta was in HNQ for sometime.

@amWhy I usually sleep in until 4:30 am. That extra half hour is vital.

Five answers to a blatant PSQ

Also it appears that a delete/undelete cycle may start

@XanderHenderson I try, and sometimes my can just sits and stares at me for a half hour, without meowing.

@ParamanandSingh On the question(s) reuns answered?

Your can "purrs"? That's a euphemism for farting, isn't it? :P

@XanderHenderson Well you try sleeping with a purring kitty sitting on your pillow staring at you! It's almost worse than him meowing.

Anyway if that question gets undelete again, we can ask them to follow the guidelines for context edits and rewrites.

@amWhy I was poking fun at your typo. :P

@ParamanandSingh Yikes! I just voted to close PSQs with answers ranging from 3 to 5, by high rep users!! Shakes head rather can cursing

And your description is one of the reasons why I don't want animals in the house.

@XanderHenderson Oh, I just noticed! Hah! ;D :P

@amWhy You got one can, but not the other. :P

@amWhy that also feels like it should have an answer on site already

@XanderHenderson Unlike youuuuuuuu, I cannot edit whenever :P

though to look up said answer and mark it as duplicate feels too generous by half

@amWhy: I checked the answers to the PSQ you mentioned (about set union/intersection). One answer in particular is a great example of people not practicing (on main) what they preach (on meta).

@amWhy :P

@ParamanandSingh btw, i should note in passing that i have fond memories of one of your elliptic integrals question :)

specifically this one, which i bookmarked back in...2014? oof

@Semiclassical: oh I got that stuff from Borwein's Pi and the AGM

nice

i was interested back then in how elliptic integrals behaved when analytically continued around the pole

C

@ArcticChar that's the kind of question i'm sorely tempted to respond with "no u".

Another one: C2 There seems to be several PSQs at the front page now.

@ParamanandSingh I think I know who you are referring to, and I agree.

this problem appeals to me, but it also looks pretty durn lacking in context: math.stackexchange.com/questions/4054188/…

@amWhy: I don't know why people need to behave that way. I am fairly certain that answering that particular PSQ ($A\cup B\subseteq A\cap B\implies A=B$) does not give a high to anyone. Yet so many answers.

@Semiclassical: that was rather new style ask a PSQ and say "hope you enjoy".

yeah

@ParamanandSingh I know, such answerers jumping at the bit for rep wear me out more than the askers of poor questions!

i mean, there is the potential that it honestly was intended as a riddle. but that's not how good problems are made

@ParamanandSingh I mean... "I know how to answer that! Here's my answer!" likely produces a little hit of dopamine.

it's also more tempting when it feels like a problem in your area of expertise/interest

@XanderHenderson: I am also fairly certain that there are many good questions waiting to be answered and will give a great amount of dopamine, but perhaps they require significant effort.

@ParamanandSingh Effort being the point. Good answers take time.

@XanderHenderson Actually for some users on this site, they've become addicted to their drug of choice: rep, and more rep... and they feed the habit of some askers: I NEED HELP, MORE HELP, ... Who feed the habit of addicted answerers, and so on in a vicious cycle.

@amWhy Gotta get that dopamine!

Yikes, another typo! "vicious cycle," not "vicious cyled"!

There, I fixed it for you. :P

@amWhy, @XanderHenderson, @Semiclassical: will try to sleep again (still 2 and half hours for my normal time to wake up). Bye!!

@XanderHenderson hahahaha! ;D I love it!

@ParamanandSingh Sleep well and dream of well framed questions, and good answers, exclusively!

Ugh... I am so ready to get a beer and call it a day. Only 30 more minutes of office hours...

@XanderHenderson Yay: only 30 minutes more... Then kick back and relax, but first handle all the craziness on math.se!! :P Just kiddin'

I mean... you think you are kidding, but now that I look, there are a metric f' ton of flags to handle.

@XanderHenderson I think the only flags I cast today were a few "very low quality" and one "not an answer", all from the review queues.

@amWhy Lots of automatic flags. Including one on a post with 83 comments in the last two days.

@XanderHenderson Yikes!! Dish out the "Comments are not intended for extended discussion..... Go to [temporary room]" or something like that. When the number of comments get that high, auto flags are generated?

@amWhy If a post gets a large number of comments in a short amount of time, automatic flags are generated. Ditto if a question or answer is edited too much.

@XanderHenderson aha! Anywho, not to burden you, but I do not welcome comments like this, accusing me of deleting answers because I deleted only questions. I responded in my last comment; but I have lost much of the respect I held for this user. I am tired of answerers hissy-fits when they lose rep for answering very poor questions.

Ugh... that comment thread is still going...

Anyway, @Xander. Nothing that needs immediate attention.

@XanderHenderson Yes, and I contributed to its length, because they continued. But I'll post no more. I'm just sick of users who try to reframe what actually happened, calling themselves "victims".

this isn't a PSQ, but it's pretty vague: math.stackexchange.com/questions/4054323/…

@amWhy besides the rep-hunting, i do get it as someone for whom writing takes effort: it's a contribution to the site which has been swept into the wastebin because of the low quality of the question, and that's frustrating. but, well: a good question is sufficient by itself to justify keeping a Q&A. a good answer isn't

and if you don't want your efforts to go to waste, apply them to questions which are worth answering

@Semiclassical I am a little bit less of a hard liner about this: if an answer is really spectacular, I am happy to keep the question (in a closed state) in order to preserve the answer.

I've not looked at these particular posts closely enough to have an opinion about whether or not the answers are good enough to keep the questions kicking around.

@Semiclassical Indeed. And I don't intend to minimize the frustration of answerers when a question they answer is closed/deleted. But when they keep doing it, just as you mentioned, there are plenty of decent questions needing good answers.

@XanderHenderson The answer by reuns in the first question he links, was a one-liner; hardly spectacular!

eh. a short argument can, at times, be far more demonstrative than a long one. (though again that does not testify to this particular case)

@XanderHenderson fair. one can definitely round that off a bit more