3:38 AM

6 hours later…
9:11 AM
here an answer was self-deleted under heavy protest although this question was asked so many times before that I stopped counting and a user with this reputation should know this.

9:36 AM
@Peter The funny thing is that the protesting user then left the identical “Please don't answer this” comment at another user's answer. But both answers are deleted now.

10:00 AM
In fact !

10:17 AM

For closure: C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7, C8, C9
For deletion: D1, D2, D3, D4, D5

11:02 AM

11:55 AM
What should be done with this - math.stackexchange.com/q/4168108/876009

math.stackexchange.com/q/3847415/876009 Please consider closing this question It has been up for long true suprisingly without closing even though it fully lacked context

1 hour later…
2:45 PM

3:05 PM
@XanderHenderson Two more votes needed for D

@Saad It has been closed, and has two delete votes.

3:27 PM

1 hour later…
4:37 PM
That question is a duplicate, absolutely. But I think it was closed with a terrible duplicate example. The answer there reduces the problem to another (concavity) that requires differentiation (should once goes the Calculus way). This in turn requires things such as $\lim_{x\rightarrow0}\frac{\sin x}{x}$, whcih requires $\sin x \leq x$ at least for $0<x<\pi/2$, going back in circles. A better duplicate should have been looked for.

[Please vote to delete](math.stackexchange.com/questions/4177332/…. The question is a poster child example of a PSQ.
@OliverDiaz Have you searched for a better duplicate? You claim "a better duplicate should have been looked for, so why don't you look for one?" My answer is *why haven't you? It is not up to ten users on this site to find the best duplicate.

5:01 PM
@amWhy I did look for good duplicates. But the text became too long to submit. In any event, some of the curators demand high quality postings, well the community should demand high quality curators. If you voted to close a duplicate, at least look that the duplicate does answer the question. Unless you one stock in ME, this is not your cite so don't act as you are Master/Mistress of MSE.
@amWhy Besides, I did posted a comment before the question was closed saying that the duplicate model was not a good one.

@OliverDiaz I looked at the dupe, and I was satisfied. I never claimed this was my "cite"[sic], and if you are going to rant against users here, it's best you take a deep breath, and relax.
@OliverDiaz If there were so many dupes (a list too long to submit), all the more reason to accept the post is a dupe, many times over.

5:24 PM
@OliverDiaz It is perfectly fine to disagree with users, but you went too far in your second to last comment directed at me.

5:55 PM
@amWhy I apologize for that. I do disagree with you in almost anything that I have seen here, however should still I respect your opinion. All this punishing culture of late (downvoting for questions not top-notch but are clear enough, excessive upvoting to questions that look kosher, as my people would say, but are full of smoke and unnecessary wording) is making many of us behave like Saramago's characters in Ensaio sobre a cegueira.

@OliverDiaz I understand there are differences of opinion on this site. I am not out to punish users; now one here is. But until askers learn this is not a site designed for "do my work for me", and until answerers stop answering PSQ's, we'll never see the end of the hundredth time most questions on this site have been asked. I think chatrooms have been enormously helpful; in terms of discussions, and to be honest, I am not out to punish new users, We'd be more effective in what we do if PSQ's
were not answered immediately. I'd be happy to grant more time before closure, provided the fastest guns in the west aren't piling on answers. So quick closure helps limit the number of answerers, at least until improved. In any case, @OliverDiaz, Thanks for returning here, and please feel free to offer your input on discussions here, as well!
(Apologies for my typos: second sentence of my first message, I meant to say "no one here is (here to punish new users).

6:25 PM
@amWhy I understand it is an ungrateful job that of a curator and that there should be some type of quality control. Again, I am not in the business of being an educator (I don't have to be inn front of 200 students in massive Calculus sessions, etc., and that for me being part of MSE is just a hobby) and many of you who are in the trenches dealing with some students cheating by taking advantage of this (and other sites out there) to outsource their homework.
@amWhy: what infuriates me often (defeating the therapeutic purposes of being at MSE) is that many of the fast guns (I will not mention names, but you may have a list yourself) become judge and jury at the same time. That is very antidemocratic and wrong. Fast guns should not be a judges!

@OliverDiaz I understand. Particularly so when some of those acting as judges and juries, contradict themselves in their own practice of answering. I'm more accustomed to FGITW (fastest guns in the West), with respect to answerers who answer questions asap. But I imaging you are using the analogy to mean "fasted guns voting to close/delete.
I tend to encounter, mostly, questions and answers showing up in review queues; I typically to be softer on the "first posts" posts. I am always eager to reopen a question, when the question has been largely improved. For quite some time now, I have held a position similar to the EoQS; that is, OPs will continue to ask very low quality questions, because there have always been plenty of answerers ready to decent and answer, often within the first five minutes following the post of a question.
It's hard for new users to understand why context matters, when for a year or so, they always got answers to PSQs. Change, sometimes, requires interruption in the "if you keep on doing what you've always done, you'll keep on getting what you always got. That may work for student assignments, but not so much in a final, or in an SAT, or GRE exam, where they don't have math.se in their pocket.
Thanks for chatting here, @OliverDiaz. Please come by here as often as you like. But to prevent myself from speaking on a soap box, I'll end by thanking you and and airing your concerns.
How can this -5 one sentence PSQ, already deleted, have 2 undelete votes., @quid, @Xander. Something doesn't smell right here.
The post appears deleted, but in the edit history, it shows "reopened". I've refreshed the question multiple times. In any case, @quid, @Xander, that question is entirely inappropriate for any user having answered it.

7:18 PM
Hi, @user21820! Can you figure out what's up with that link I last provided??
@user21820 I just mean that when I go to the linked post, and refresh it, and click on the edit history, the last change in status is listed as "reopened", which is not reflected in the post. Ahh, let me check out the time line....

@NikhilKumarSingh That is up for deletion now.
@amWhy I don't understand it either. Maybe ask @XanderHenderson?
In any case, unilateral PSQ-reopeners can be flagged as per EOQS.

@user21820 Even the time line states the same. Thanks though, for taking a look. Xander told me yesterday, early that he doesn't plan to be around any time this weekend.
@user21820 Good point!

@amWhy Oh okay. Maybe @quid can explain the bug? I vaguely recall SE has some kind of bug like this, but don't remember what.
@Saad C7 is closed.

@quid If you stop in any time today or tomorrow, could you take a look at the post I linked above, namely I'm puzzled at how a -5 onde-sentence PSQ, already deleted, have two undelete votes?... But in fact, the edit history and timeline indicate the most recent activity is the reopen. Then why is it both closed and deleted? I side with the latter,
...but I've not seen this before.
@user21820 We'll see =) Thanks.

7:33 PM
D1, D2, D3.
D4, D5, D6.
D7, D8, D9.
C1, C2, C3.
C4, C5, C6.
C7, C8, C9.

8:23 PM
@OliverDiaz two undelete-votes !

8:34 PM
@Peter The question is a PSQ! I guess I'll start ignoring your questions for closure of PSQs, in case my closure might offend a friend.

@amWhy I pointed out that this question has two undelete-votes which is incomprehensible. I do not understand your reply.

9:19 PM
@Peter I misunderstood you, thinking you were supporting the undeletion. I feel the same way, incomprehensible. My apologies!
Hey there, @vitamind ! o/

9:36 PM
Hello!

2 hours later…
11:41 PM
@amWhy I don't see it as closed.
Maybe that changed.
In any case it is possible that a deleted question gets reopened; that's a bit unsusal but came up at times.
If it's not reflected in how the post is displayed than that's odd.
As for undelete votes, given that OP's can vote to undelete and there is at least one user that seems to like the post two undelete votes are at least hypothetically easily sourced.