math.stackexchange.com/q/4170952/876009 Please vote to close this question

Also surprisingly this question has got a very lengthy answer. A answer which the question definitely not deserve

For deletion: d-i, d-ii

For closure: c-i, c-ii

@XanderHenderson This one I am not sure about. The user hasn't been able to spot their error in their working, and I don't think a duplicate covers that issue. @user2661923 I think the problem with the question is in the wording : It is not clear at all if 5000 is paid ONCE (and left for 25 years with compound interest) or annually. The clarification, rather funnily, was not then of the attempt but of the phrasing of the question.

What is written can be seen in two ways : "deposits 5000 into an account paying 1.25% interest per year" , which can be read as having deposited only 5000 per year. The other way is "deposits 5000 into an account paying 1.25% interest per year" : put the emphasized words together and you get $5000$ per year being deposited. I don't see why the second way is a natural way of reading the question at all, but more importantly...

... anything clarifying this situation will probably have to be a comment rather than an answer, because I don't think the error is mathematical as much as it is English syntactical!

But I am still surprised, that under the accepted answer, the OP did not ask why their apparent interpretation wasn't correct. This surprises me, because honestly I still see the OP's interpretation as the correct one! What a funny question. Either way, such a question wouldn't remain on site regardless of what you do with it : thankfully comments exist, address it in the comments, give OP hints for what happens if 5000 per year is deposited, and move on.

CORRECTION : In my second paragraph above, first sentence, I meant to write "... as having deposited 5000 only once".

And what that means, is that while I initially left comments for improvement, I think this question doesn't serve a purpose to anybody beyond the OP, due to the nature of the error. Perhaps for that reason alone it will remain closed.

I think this question might be opinion-based or lacking a clearly defined question, since it seems to me the question is "what does the op think is better" or lacking clearly defined criteria.

PSQ

c-iii, d-iii

Is this question, very low quality?

3:2 now

D

Do I miss something or does this make no sense ?

@user21820 Why did you ping especially me ? Maybe because I once complained about $0.999\cdots=1$ - questions ? I agree however that this post has little merit.

Should I delete the question, or post an answer? Thanks.

@epsilon-emperor I think your question is a duplicate or has been solved somewhere before (and I received your reminder, thanks) I think it's better to delete, although there's nothing wrong with your question, for a second reason : the effort you've already shown actually nearly leads to the answer, so much so that I'd expect your answer to be quite short, and I don't want people to take up an issue regarding the brevity of the answer.

(On second thoughts and some searching, there may not be a perfect duplicate, but I think my second reason qualifies).

Got it - I have deleted it now.

@epsilon-emperor Thanks! There were some recent issues around self-answers : my personal stance(which I violated only once when I was still an on-site novice) is that if I get an answer to a question I wrote , then I delete the question. I've done this about 10-15 times already.

@TeresaLisbon Did I understand this right ? You (occasionally) delete questions after having received an answer ? I hope I misunderstood this because this would be very rude to the answerer having put effort into the question. Unless of course, the answer was posted AFTER the self-answer and this self-answer was already complete and nothing had been to add.

@Peter No, that's the point : I delete questions when I get the answer to them before anyone else does.

So nobody loses anything out of it, and I can't self answer because usually the answer would then just be like 2 or 3 more lines and I don't find it useful to be putting it as an answer : so I just delete it.

Any factor found ? I now run 11M-curves on C189 . This number is really tough !

No, not yet. I'll get back to you when I find a factor, it's been tough going. I'm running a 1M check.

c-iv, c-v

c-vi

d-iv

@Peter Indeed, I thought you would be specifically interested in getting rid of such questions.

If you or anyone else agrees that it is not worth keeping, you can vote to close it.

@Saad Ask @XanderHenderson if he agrees with unilaterally closing it since it is such a blatant violation of site guidelines, being 4 PSQs with a bounty to protect it from closure so that the asker can get an answer (quite clearly to finish up a homework assignment): (1) Show me the solution; (2) Find a proof for me; (3) Look at how many parts my homework has! (4) Show that you want to do my homework for me.

@ArcticChar That PSQ is now up for deletion.

@JitendraSingh Open for deletion.

@amWhy @amWhy Thanks

Please dv for deletion; also, please delete the poor answer.

@amWhy downvoted now up for deletion

Please close this no effort/no context question

@JitendraSingh Thanks!

Both question and answer are open for deletion

@amWhy needs just one more delete vote

Guys I have recently asked a question however I feel I have provided very less context and the question might be closed. Is the context provided enough or what context I can add in this question if it lacks context because this is more of a theory question? The link of the question is here - math.stackexchange.com/q/4171903/876009

@JitendraSingh It's enough context but frankly it's just a simple misconception on your part. As John Douma said in a comment, "..." just means that some things are omitted. It does not and cannot indicate any pattern. If you want to specify a pattern, you must explicitly describe the pattern, otherwise you cannot say you have a pattern.

So "1,2,3,..." does not indicate a pattern. People who read it may assume there is a pattern, but they may be wrong.

It's also not really about mathematics, because "..." has been around in English and probably other languages ever since 1588 or even earlier, so I wouldn't be against closure.

See, maybe I'm talking about Fibonacci: 1,2,3,5,8,13,...

@ParamanandSingh Thanks!

@user21820 Thanks as well, to you too for voting to delete the question I last linked to.

cv-pls factorial Unclear, ill-posed question. Has attracted crankery in the answers. Seems to be of little value? Is there (theoretically) a number that is a multiple of all natural numbers?‭ - Libby‭ 2021-06-01 19:32:08Z

close

I'd close it myself, but it has been controversial on Meta.

(seems like) a (homework) psq

@XanderHenderson It's not really different than questions like " 0.999999 ..., with an infinite number of nines, how can we say it equals one? Sometimes weird things happen at infinity". It reads like a mind game, nothing more. I voted to close it.

The possibility of shielding a question from closure with a bounty causes an additional time pressure for the close-voters. This is contrary to the philosophy to wait for improvements. Not a lucky feature.

@Peter Was the question @Xander mention shielded for a week due to a bounty?

I do not know which was the most recent case, this was rather a general statement.

Arg.... Obvious, clear duplicate. Yet many answers. Sigh

The bogus attempt at the e+π open problem is now up for deletion.

@amWhy Yeah, that is my feeling on the question. It is numerological nonsense. As noted in one of the answers, there could, maybe, be a meaningful answer, but not really as-posed.

Is it this ? I cannot vote to close it. Seems to have been reopened and/or bountied.

@user21820 Needs three more delete votes. I cast the second. Due to 6 undeserved upvotes, we need five delete votes to delete it.

@Peter That's the post Xander was referring to, to which I responded above. Looks like it went through the close queue, got 3 leave open. It was never closed, nor bountied.

close fast before it gets an answer

@XanderHenderson It's probably not numerology, since it does not seek to find a pattern where there is none. However, I voted to close it as unclear.

@vitamind One more close vote needed.

@Peter According to the timeline, you previously voted to delete that question. The vote aged away. As you have previously voted to close, you cannot vote to close again.

@user21820 one more delete-vote needed.

@XanderHenderson Do you understand my dilemma, when flagging posts? All the answers, (I would have flagged the two you commented on) are upvoted and I don't have the means to create folders for various users, to store links to their offenses, to do @quid's bidding, of sparing mods flag duty by forcing us to do such work, in addition to work, without which, mods would flounder. Mods certainly have the means to store data on users, over and above what regular users have. I say this, because nothing

@user21820 @Peter It already has four deleting votes, but it is still undeleted. I don't know why.

@Xander (cont) ...is going to change if answerers are willing to risk deletes, for the many times they escape notice for answer dupes and PSQs.

It needs 5 delete-votes , probably because of the +6-score

@JoséCarlosSantos Because it has too many upvotes. That's why downvoting bad questions is not superfluous.

@amWhy I believe that quid's point is that someone has to keep track of which users have posted answers where. If you want to do that, it would be helpful---but noone (not even quid) is really asking you to do that. The alternative is that the moderators have to do this, and it takes time. So please be patient.

I will also note that I have issued a number of suspensions related to the EoQS policy, that a couple of users have had two suspensions (a 1 day suspension, followed by a 7 day suspension), and I am getting ready to issue the first 30 day suspensions.

@XanderHenderson I am not blaming mods. Yes, I have been patient for more than a month, and what do I see? The regular offenders regularly offending. I am merely maintaining that none of us can afford to stop flagging, or commenting. It was not directed at you.

A month really isn't very long to change behaviour which as persisted for years.

This is a marathon, not a sprint.

D1, D2, D3.

D4, D5, D6.

D7, D8, D9.

D10, D11, D12.

@XanderHenderson Yes, I've seen that, and I think a few of you are doing a great job of enforcing the EoQS; and I expected there would be some pushback from answerers. Please know I don't want this site, or the supportive folks wrt the EoQS, to let up, quite yet. I'm talking as much to users here. I was just explaining to you what concerns me, but not accusing mods.

C1, C2, C3.

C4, C5, C6.

C7, C8, C9.

C10, C11, C12.

Sorry for the interruption.

@amWhy there is not all that much we have either, however that is somewhat besides the point, because the full recent history is usually not reviewed. If it would be done it could just be flagged as such. "This user answered a PSQ in addition the last 5 of their 8 answers also are of this form, namely id1, id2, id3, id4, id5"

@XanderHenderson Yes, I understand.

That's not much harder to do for a user than for a moderator.

@Mathphile Hi, do you happen to have enough rep for a delete-vote ?

@XanderHenderson: Do you want to cast the 5th (presumably last-needed) delete-vote on the e+π question?

Don't think so

Regarding keeping track, it really depends on ones local setup. If one mostly uses SE from a personal computer one could just bookmark the posts in the browser (not on se), one could structure them according to users using subdirectories. One could also have a textfile.

@quid mods are protected from repercussions from scouring a users answering history. You doing that will likely not bring the wrath of PT down on you; as a regular user, if I see a naughty answer by a user, and check their recent answer history to find more evidence, that will set off sirens with some moderators. You think all mods think like you or Xander. That's simply not the case. I have to weigh the risk of a mod's ire/suspension, in absolutely everything I do.

@amWhy alright we'll see about that.

@quid Ditto for moderators, after receiving a flag... store and see if there's a pattern of flags.

@amWhy yes obviously, but usually things are not systematically flagged, which is normal, thus one needs to compare against the recent record.

@quid I'm not dismissing you, @quid.

This is made more difficult by users flagging old posts.

It is not really helpful to get EoQS flags on posts from january.

It is also not really helpful to get flags on posts that are two weeks old especially not if the user had been suspended in the interim.

The answer of this is nonsense, or do I miss something ? First, a supernatural number is not a natural number as desired and even if we allow it, is it actually a MULTIPLE of every natural number ? Something like "$\infty !$" ? Would be weird.

@quid You do realize that "Jan" ≈ "Jun", don't you? =)

@user21820 i was raised in May.

Oh.

@quid In my last flag on one user, I referenced a flag I cast against the same user two days ago. I understand, re: the timeliness, and when I realize the post preceded May 6,7,8, I retract the flag. Please know that most posts I flag I've encountered in the review queues, usually the questions asked, and when I see answers (answer: 0-?) to a PSQ, I open it, and look at the answers. I typically assume they are relatively recent posts, but that's not always the case. But quid, I'd like

you to start putting more emphasis on the 95% of the thinks I do well, and a little less on your nitpicking of 1% of the things you resent that I do. Can you do that? It's a cup almost full, or a cup almost empty. Which would you grab if you were extremely thirsty?

@quid and @Xander, and I, ditto with respect to each of you; focus more on how helpful you are, than what frustrates me.

The point is that the discussion is framed as if the moderators were constantly dropping the ball while it is all presented to them on a silver-platter. I see you last comment now, yes, that's maybe a good idea.

@TheSimpliFire Hi, hope you have enough rep for a delete-vote to finally get rid of "e+pi"

@Peter Forgive me for not knowing the context, but why are we deleting old questions?

@TheSimpliFire this

@quid That first sentence is a mischaracterization, focusing on a glass with one teaspoon of liquid. So please pay attention to my good idea just prior to what you consider a good idea. If you cannot treat me in the way you want to be treated, then one, you shouldn't moderate. But it likely reflects an attitude to easily acquired among mods around a few years.

@user21820 Since moderator deletions cannot be undone by the community, I am hesitant to vote to delete. If the question becomes the subject of a delete war, I am willing to reconsider.

@TheSimpliFire This is one of the most famous open conjectures. And questions about such conjectures are definitely off-topic.

@amWhy I subsumed that into the last sentence of my comment.

@Peter Whilst the problem is an open one, my understanding is that the post asks for an attempt correction in general terms, and it would be equally valid if the transcendental numbers were replaced by other irrational numbers.

I don't support deletion.

@user21820 My last try for today. @RRL One more delete-vote needed.

→ 1 message moved to ­Trash

Rather fruitless to try to clean this site - too many users delete too few posts. I leave now. Good night.

@RRL, @TheSimpliFire, @JitendraSingh, @JyrkiLahtonen, @JoséCarlosSantos, @Joe, Feel free to join us in the Cafe chat room next door: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/112937/…, for a word challenge: team effort! All are welcome!

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Url in title (95): In the graph shown, what is (g – f)(4)? gyazo.com/fecfd00699a072771c4194f93af2626f by Omer Yahya on math.SE

→ 1 message moved to Cafe and Tavern on the math.se

→ 1 message moved to Cafe and Tavern on the math.se

close