close integral PSQ

close this PSQ.

PSQ from a long-time, high-rep user.

@user1729 Closed. Now, to downvote and get it to -3, or to wait for deletion to be available and then delete : that is the question.

PSQ answerers when a PSQ arrives but they are also thinking about what the moderators will do at the same time

@TeresaLisbon Because of the upvoted answer, we should downvote it as quickly as possible.

@Peter Great. Three more required @amWhy @XanderHenderson

I admire the answer there, on a second reading, but that's the classic example of doing the wrong thing, but doing it very well.

C/D

Close this question as well

@TeresaLisbon Which post?

@amWhy Hey, sorry. This one although now it has -3 votes, so let's delete!

@user1729 Close, open for deletion.

@TeresaLisbon user1729's most recent request, I cast the third dv, and first delete votes..., what confused me was your reference to Peter, but I get that Peter was commenting on that post.

@amWhy Thanks, I've put a second delete vote. Should be gone in no time.

It really helps if people click on the blue down-triangle when hovering over the start of a post you want to reply to, clicking it, then click "reply-to"...

@amWhy I will do it from now on , I was culpable on a few occasions.

@TeresaLisbon No problem, it's not always on the front of one's mind when eagerly participating in a fast paced discussion!! ;D

@amWhySpeaking of which, have you placed a delete vote on this answer? Also see if you have downvoted and deleted the question of which this is an answer.

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad ns for domain in body, potentially problematic ns configuration in body (97): How do I find or derive circumspherical radii, surface area, and volume for these 5 non-traditional concave polyhedra? by Wesley Allen Williams on math.SE

@TeresaLisbon Why isn't there a possibilty for (highly) trusted users to immediatly delete or close a question? (I know that (only?) gold-badge guys in some topics can do this) But wouldn't it make MSE better and "cleaner" if, I don't know for example, JoseSanCarlos, amWhy, moderators etc. could do this?

@vitamind moderators can do this, but for everyone else: how do you decide which people you give the powers to?

(Also, gold badge people can only close as duplicates.)

@user1729 These people should be picked by hand since one has to be extremely careful. But I believe there are some active, long-term users that can be fully trusted. I just can't see why these users cannot close/delete posts by themselves.

@vitamind This would lead to the deletion of tons of good questions just because some high-rep user does not like it. This cannot be the goal of this site. That moderators can do it ALONE is already not necessarily something good.

@vitamind But picked by who? By us, the users, as we pick moderators? But then they would really just be a "sub-moderator", so they might as well be just moderators....

I agree with @Peter though, that even if an individual user has this power they should use it sparingly.

(Speaking as a Gold Badge holder, I often feel uncomfortable closing a question as a duplicate without someone else's opinion to back me up. If I am unsure then I sometimes make myself feel better by commenting on the question giving my reasoning.)

@Peter@user1729 I'm not talking just about some high rep user. If picked, then by the moderators. I mean there does not have to be a big event or something like this. Just a simple tool to clean this site more up. Also I had only very, very low quality posts in mind, which should be obviously closed. (And there are too many already). Lastly, I just wanted to clarify that this is not an idea how it should be, only why it isn't like this and what would be major problems.

@vitamind I agree that there are too many low quality posts (including those upvoted to heaven with answers upvoted to heaven as well). If moderators could close/delete them, I in fact wonder why they don't do it. Perhaps because they have another opinion what is low quality. And of course because noone can have the overview of all posts on this site. To do this automatically is also a double-edged sword. There is no "algorithm" to decide whether a question is good or not.

Please help to reopen. I see no real need for clarification in this question. If you see I will edit.

@user The answer has been accepted , and to be honest, I agree with the closure although I was not one of the close-voters.

@Peter Why do you agree and why the acceptance of the answer is important?

@user That the user accepted the answer basically means that he/she does not expect a better answer. I agree to the closure because the question lacks clarity.

@Peter My argument: 1) I can imagine asking the same question. 2) the answer is far from obvious. 3) the same question is asked today and the asker was probably not able to find the question (I assume one needs a high reputation for this).

@Peter If the question lacks clarity I agree to edit it in accord with your requirements though in my opinion the question is completely clear. Besides it was already edited by a user with very high reputation (I assume his username was Rahul).

@user Do they really need high reputation to search a closed post? Of course one need 10k+ to see deleted posts.

@ArcticChar I don't quite understand how one can search for something what one cannot see.

@user IIUC all users can search for closed posts.

@ArcticChar: What does this mean: "(Viewable by the post author and users with the close/reopen votes privilege)"

Oh, they mean the message in the box, not the post.

@user BTW did you forgot to vote to reopen?

@ArcticChar I see. I am sorry for the mistake. But the other two arguments remain.

@ArcticChar I have voted to reopen.

→ 1 duplicate message moved to Sandbox

@ArcticChar Closed posts can be found via search, no problem.

@user I agree with (1) and (2) but I also agree with @Peter that the question is indeed lacking in clarity as the asker should be explaining the context of the question (synthetic geometry? analytic geometry?). I don't mind it open as it is just a terminology question, but I don't mind it closed either.

@user1729 @vitamind: That's precisely why I think people who are given unilateral votes should be instead given 2 votes, so that they can use them as normal users do. (Unfortunately, this is not something SE is likely to change. If you think it's a good idea, maybe you can suggest it on Meta!)

@user21820 My main reason was a mistake concerning the ability of users to see the closed questions. But in any way: I do not know the exact name for the geometric object and I am not sure that the given answer is correct. It would be nice if a user with sufficient knowledge had a possibility to add a new answer.

@user One problem with that post is that there is ambiguity in the word "established". I work in a field where that region shows up a lot in the last 10 years. We used to call it "strip" region (might be because there's one highly cited paper used this term). I was a bit surprised when I saw "slab" in a recent paper. Never heard of this term. It might be established, just not established in my field.

@ArcticChar You can now add a new answer or a comment. The question is reopened. I will vote to close today's duplicate.

In @user's question, my sympathy is with the user/OP. Despite people voting for it to remain closed, noone bothered to reply to their comment asking what else is expected (and they were last seen only a few days ago so likely would have seen a reply). I can see @user21820's point about context...(synthetic geometry? analytic geometry?), but noone suggested that to the user.

@user1729 That's why I don't mind it being open. I don't impose high standards on questions that are unambiguously out of curiosity or about terminology. (Other close-voters of course may have different opinions.)

@user1729 In any case, I have added a comment to that question.

@user21820 My point isn't really to have an opinion about closure, but instead to criticise the 6 people who voted for it to remain closed but didn't reply to the comment.(And thanks for adding the comment. It is a good point.)

@user1729 I am sorry for a naive question: how can one observe the voting process?

@user Its in the timeline: click on the mini clock below the voting arrows (or go to math.stackexchange.com/posts/3380366/timeline, where the number 3380366 is the post ID), and click on the "reopen" in each of the red areas signifying a failed review queue thing.

(I should say that I don't think its helpful to dwell on individuals who vote - I counted 6 people, but I didn't look at their names.)

@user1729 Thank you!

@user I don't know why. But this question has been reopened very fast indeed. I am still not convinced, but I have to accept this decision. Congratulations.

@Peter For me it is absolutely unclear why it is so hard to reopen a question on MSE. I remember still my first closed questions and my hour-long work on editing them. With no result! And actually nobody could explain me what was wrong with these questions. This was REALLY frustrating experience.

@user It makes sense that a question is hard to reopen. If 5 users (which must have relatively high rep to close-vote) decide to close a question, usually this is justified. If a moderator closed a question, this can be different. I do not know whether a moderator can also reopen a question alone, if so, you can flag a closed question for this purpose.

I've just seen Mick's nomination for a moderator position on MO. (Obviously) he's not qualified for that (don't get me wrong neither am I) but the comments of other (experienced) MO users made me speachless, also knowing that the worst comments were already deleted by a moderator. What do you guys think of that? (Keep in mind that they're all adults!!) [I know this does not belong in CURED but I'd really like to hear opinions from professionals.]

@Peter The argument with 5 users is not convincing. You know: one can be a good mathematician but have rather poor abilities what concerns moderation of a internet-community. And my main point was completely different: it is really frustrating if one cannot reopen the question by an appropriate edit. And the question which we have opened just now was appropriately edited. I am quite sure that it was not even closed if this was its original form.

@user I find the 5-user-argument convincing, but the other argument has its point. The catch is that users have to look if the edit actually improves the question. To give the decision to the editor alone would mean that anyone that makes a (perhaps absurd) edit could reopen the question BY this edit.

@Peter The worst thing is that the reasons for closure are completely unclear. And OP has no option to improve the question. From the very beginning I asked to provide suggestions how the question can be improved. So please write your suggestions. I will introduce them into the question even after it is reopened.

@vitamind To be able to judge , we have to knwo the details first. What exactly made you speechless ?

Exacr dupe with non-novel self-answer.

@BillDubuque Closed and downvoted, in anticipation of deletion.

@BillDubuque I should remark that this was originally posted as solution-verification question.

@user But the question post still reads like a PSQ. I'd ask the author to edit : "please see my answer below to this question and suggest feedback" for starters. That is ,I'd like them to assert that they want feedback. The fact that the assertion is missing is what swings this question, IMO.

We have a lot of questions that are basically those which seek verification of an OP provided proof to a question which is already on MSE. However, those which assert that it is the proof that requires scrutiny, will not only be open, but will also receive directed attention to that effect.

Solution verification should be used only when the solution is included in the question. Else the verification is not solely about the question, but also the answer.

If a person is sincere in posting a solution-verification question, then there is some degree of concern the solution is not correct, and they are seeking feedback. In which case they should include their solution in the question field. The question in question (sorry for the pun) looks like they intended to both ask a question about something they already knew, before asking, and had little doubt was wrong. Those are the kinds of posts I have problems with.

Imho unless a verification question includes a specific question about some step in the proof then it should be closed for lack of context. Too many of these are fishing expeditions which often lead to poor answers due to such (and are also fertile grounds for rep farmers to pick & choose trivial parts to answer)

@amWhy Excellent point. Such a question would come across as a "share-your-knowledge" but in disguised fashion, since the question post looks like that of a typical PSQ.

@BillDubuque Good point! E.g., if an asker has a proof, solution verification should only be used when the reason for the need for verification is given, e.g. uncertainty about a step, etc.

@TeresaLisbon Exactly, and this site is not meant for "share my knowledge" by asking and answering something you have not question about. I have no problem when a user asks a question, and a day later, has an aha moment before other answers, and informs us "I solved it, given the hints in comments! Here's the answer: ...

@BillDubuque Thanks for posting this here!

@amWhy The "share my knowledge" thing, I've never used it. But I could imagine one and only one scenario : when a "canonical duplicate" is created, containing an "ideal question" with an "ideal answer" , maybe by a moderator of by somebody requested to do so.

Finally, that question has -1 votes, we have to get it to -3.

@TeresaLisbon Yes, absolutely! That's a good exception to the rule. I already downvoted both question and answer... waiting to pounce on deletion.

@amWhy Same here. Till then , let me begin : the daily PSQ Crawl!

Duplicate , worth deleting?

PSQ

@TeresaLisbon Yes. It is a very frequently asked question and the attempt (I tried...) strikes me as a bit superficial, since they didn't include their work. It is open for deletion, with first delete vote cast.

@amWhy Thanks, the march continues with : PSQ, or good enough? I think not

@TeresaLisbon AND ASKED by a user with over 1K rep. And answered by DMcMor, and accepted. Also answered by Igor. >:{

@amWhy True. Here's another one to delete!

@TeresaLisbon I think not, as well, and note the repeat offender answering crap!

@TeresaLisbon Note the author on that; another one who is answering poor posts. Only one more delete vote needed for the question.

@amWhy The rampage continues with : Too little context?

@TeresaLisbon Methinks so. I already close voted previously. One more close votes, with the current -4 score, and it's on its way to deletion.

Lacks context?

PSQ

@TeresaLisbon I agree with closing (and did you forget to close?)

@amWhy looking at that 50 questions query on meta, my reaction is: "That really sounds like more of a 'you' problem."

@user21820 Forgot, being myself. Anyway, here's one that was here earlier , and I'm sending it back as a reminder.

@Semiclassical I don't understand what you are referring to?

Needs one more delete vote. Kindly oblige!

maybe i'm being rude/dismissive about "i can't afford better help than MSE" but

"I've asked too many questions, what do i do" -> ask fewer, better questions

Ahh, @Semiclassical I see. Yes. I agree with your initial assessment, and that was just the start, after questions, there emerged from the OP the existence of a sister he was also posing for.... etc... etc... I am not fond of moving targets with respect to "changing stories." Perhaps he was honest, but perhaps he's a smooth operator. The excuses just seemed to increase under questioning.

right

Unclear Q

@Semiclassical Once I saw the question, I knew precisely the meaning of your first comment. But at first with "you" in the comment, I though you were questioning a post from me, which made no sense to me! ;D Thanks for clarifying!

lol

Hello guys! I need your help in deleting an answer I received on Meta. The user and I had a very long discussion and I also asked a few other users that agree with me. I wrote one thing that is not factually not correct (My mistake was not to ask but I just stated that the user is a rep gamer) but hopefully you'll see where my thought comes from. I also said that I believe him.

Okay now enough about me, the reasons I'd like to delete this answer are in the comments. If you disagree in certain points with me please write a message in here so I can clarify some things if neccessary. Also please note that he brings a lot of straw man arguments!

I feel like I should clarify some things: 1. The answer is bad, which is based one facts and is not an opinion. It creates a huge drop of image quality, which has been proven. Now writing this again- but as a solution is - again a fact - a bad answer.

Duplicate question not good enough to stay?

2. He said something like "Furture readers should benefit from the answer", which is correct (straw man argument) but they won't benefit. I asked this question not for me, I asked it for the MS community so my opinion what solution should be used does not matter at all. I just don't want that future readers adapt this method.

@TeresaLisbon I am sorry for my ignorance. What is "PSQ"? I have found noting appropriate in Google.

Duplicate, ciertamente not good enough to stay. Still answered

@user "Problem statement question". The abbreviation is endemic to MSE.

@TeresaLisbon Or "please-solve-questions" which boils down to the same.

@Peter Nice one, will keep this one in mind as well.

I always thought this would be meant :)

A certain high rep user has answered SIXTEEN questions today. It is an exhibition in precis writing. Very special, but I remember somebody saying on meta (some time ago) that new users wouldn't get a chance to answer a good question unless they themselves hada very specific expertise in some subject. Another user answered nine.

One more downvote, then delete

PSQ

Also see the interaction beneath the answer on the first link.

Finish line, مارہابا

C/D

@Peter Question : 3 minutes ago. First answer : 2 minutes ago, high rep user. Third answer : wrong, and one minute ago. Impatience.

similar to 1+2+3+4+...=-1/12 nonsense (I guess again some kind of "regularization")

close this

@TeresaLisbon In fact, really sad, the quick answer, apparently the way to get astronomical rep.

Don't these users with such high reputation feel irritated when they write 1 line answers to PSQs?

@ShubhrajitBhattacharya Apparently not. I spoke of the high rep user who answered sixteen questions today. It's remarkable, each one is a one-liner. That's the kind of service required for stand-up comedians and script writers, not MSE.

@TeresaLisbon Well said, really true!

Another thing, see what's happening in the post you attached. The answer which had three downvotes now has got two upvotes , and therefore the total reputation gained is 20 - 6 = 14. Who is the winner? If we delete the post, that user still loses no reputation.

@ShubhrajitBhattacharya In fact I cannot see the purpose of this. Some people just like astronomical reps, who knows for what. That would not matter if this would not turn this site to something like a "do my homework" site. But as long nothing is done against this awful practice, they will continue as long as they are able to post answers here.

@Peter Yeah. If they can't be stopped forcibly, in some sense, which is difficult also, they will continue this awful practice.

@TeresaLisbon Correct!

The reputation was at last, perhaps not so a well idea. It causes all these problems that would probably not occur without rep and the privileges.

@Peter It's the same reason people get addicted to Cookie Clicker.

Like in ArtofPeoblemSolving, there is only the facility of liking other's posts. No reputation and no privileges.

@user21820 I don't know why , but equating a platform for learning mathematics with a game , it hurts me. Of course you are right, but from the inside it really pains. I never gamed reputation in the manner some of these people do. It is very emotional to see the way the high-rep users basically play with the lives of users, feeding them useless one-liners. No explanation, no drive to improve.

@TeresaLisbon I admit I 'gamed' it once, in obtaining the "fanatic" badge. But I think not in any other way, and definitely not for rep.

Seeing some users not only game the system, but also show disrespect for it and towards others who are trying to direct them correctly. Even if you see my answers to PSQs, of which I had about 40 , most of which I deleted about a year ago, they very rarely are short in length and non-comprehensive. I would rather drink bleach than write a one-line answer to a PSQ.

@TeresaLisbon I wouldn't be so harsh; I don't mind seeing a carefully crafted hint that leaves most of the work to the asker. Then again, that's not what usually happens, and as you said PSQ answerers tend to nullify the efforts of others who try to improve the question quality.

@vitamind I've downvoted the answer, and voted to delete, it is open for deletion.

@vitamind We're not all literally "guys"... but I think I understand you were addressing all CURED participants.

@vitamind Good call! I also flagged two of his comments, one as rude.

@user21820 That's true. My viewpoint was restricted because I struggle to recall recent examples of the phenomena you speak of! Near-sighted response alert! Anyway, with that , my dear மக்களே, I shall find myself in dreamland shortly. Enjoy the day! One last thing : @vitamind That troublesome answer is closed, but do visit here more often!

@TeresaLisbon See you!

@TeresaLisbon That needs one more downvote to be up for deletion.

@user21820 Indeed, especially in the time <= 2015. I did quite well and answered I imagine what we now know to be PSQs on occasion. I was an idealist in my first five years here, sincerely thinking I was helping students, and earned a lot of rep. Perhaps there was "self-competion", wanting to out perform the previous day, which is sort of gaming. But I sincerely do not recall as many PSQs as we see now.

@TeresaLisbon See you!

@amWhy Yea I also recall the front page being more full of interesting questions. Right now, if we randomly click on the front page, half(?) are PSQs?

@user21820 Yup. Yup. Yup. Indeed!!

Ok I just tried it, maybe not as bad as half yet, or maybe I got lucky just now haha..

Alright I have to go soon! See you all around!

@user21820 Yeah, and on Sunday (the last day before classes when things are due) there are probably than 50% of PSQ's.

@amWhy Aha, I'll try again on sunday. =P

See you too! @Xander.

@vitamind Did you try flagging the answer? Just curious.

Oh, @vitamind, I see the answer has been deleted. Yay!

@BillDubuque, @TeresaLisbon, @user1729 this post, discussed above has been deleted by the OP. You should all get peer pressure badges!

@TeresaLisbon@amWhy@otherhelpers Thank you :)!