@Zhe without doubt, must've been very easy for you :P But I like to think of those upvotes in a way that: they validate how well you explained a topic to others who didn't know about it (which you excellently did!), not how well you already knew about it yourself; so I insist you to keep on answering beginner questions, they really help ^_^

@Martin-マーチン (and anyone else improving my suggested edits) Could you please leave a short, template comment like "I improved your edit" directed at me whenever you improve my edits. I checked everywhere, and apparently it's impossible to be notified when someone improves my edits, instead of just accepting them. Your improved edits help me a lot to learn mathjax/latex/how to do that stuff more neatly, so I'd really wish to view them and try not to repeat the same thing in future, thanks! ^_^

@GaurangTandon i'll try to keep that in mind, but no promises. When you review these changes, you don't have the possibility to add a comment. You'll need to open the question separately, and if there are a couple of edits, I will probably just forget. Don't worry too much about it though, I find you have quite a good track record of suggesting edits, and it helps a lot. so adding a few things here and there is no problem.

@Martin-マーチン ok thanks ^_^

@GaurangTandon there's an FR on meta.SE to be able to add a comment while improving an edit.

@M.A.R. already seen that proposal and added my upvote and comment to it as well ;)

@M.A.R. link or it didn't happen

@BountyHunter vote heavily on that one!

@Martin-マーチン meta.stackexchange.com/q/261053/256391 though I just noticed it is tagged "support" instead of "feature-request"

I concur with that post, if it was improved it was still useful. I see that you want to get even better, but that just takes time, don't force it. My initial edits were not complete and I still makes mistakes. Sometimes it needs more than one mind. Don't worry about it.

Alright ^_^

@GaurangTandon this is the better kind of edit, one that tightens up the wording and readability: chemistry.stackexchange.com/revisions/51962/2

Why is there so much space around the solidus "/" in \pu{-1181 kJ/mol * 1 mol}? That looks wrong.

$$\pu{-1181 kJ/mol * 1 mol}$$

meh, mathjax in chat isn't working again

I guess you're supposed to use $$\pu{-1181 kJ/mol} \cdot \pu{1 mol}$$

Probably because * in \pu is used for compound units.

"-1181 kJ/mol * 1 mol" is not permissible anyway

as it is written in the post

@pentavalentcarbon yes, I always forget about the \begin{align}, it's excellent! Though half way through that edit I had thought I was never going to finish it, but then decided to finish it anyway :P thanks for improving!

@GaurangTandon don't worry about not using it, it's a pain and not important for stuff that isn't actually equations

being picky about most formatting stuff here just isn't that worthwhile since mathjax is a pos

@orthocresol ? gist.githubusercontent.com/berquist/…

I don’t know, it could have been a browser issue and i wasn’t really inclined to investigate.

@GaurangTandon That's very generous of you

@orthocresol I should use slash pu a lot more than I do right now, which is not at all

@Zhe I prefer "not at all".

@Zhe an upvote? Come on

@M.A.R. No, everything else he said...

@Zhe an everything else he said? Come on

I recommend direct sunlight

Ugh, someone should probably delete this

@M.A.R. Self-deprecation is my preferred mode... :/

@Zhe I'm just playing dude

@M.A.R. I know

I'm running low on wittiness today

Cool. Teach that to penta

So he'd stop trying to make puns as awesome as mine

I don't want to mess with someone who's got an extra bond...

Good grief. I did like, 19000 reviews right now

Hi @Rick. Welcome!

Probably

@M.A.R. Hi

The reviews just kept coming

@Zhe nah, his bonds are Chinese

Nothing to worry about

I am not Chinese

Your bonds are not you

I am hungry

They can be Chinese

And poorly made

@pentavalentcarbon you're a whole country?

I find that unacceptable

YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID

"you'd argument" isn't grammatically correct

I edited it.

YOUR COUNTER ARGUMENT IS INVALID

but my comment on your incorrectness is for eternity

It would be INVALID for eternity then

Why? Because your name is italic?

Guess what, mine is italicker

argumentum ad verecundiam

I still don't understand the ice cream argument

@Loong Ejusdem Generis

@pentavalentcarbon veni vidi vici vinnie whiny meanie

@Zhe at first I wanted to use Jacobsen's original procedure for the asymmetric imine cyanation, but that Org Lett paper you cited (doi.org/10.1021/ol902540h) looks so much easier...

I think I was looking for substrate generality

I've done this enough times where if you show me a substrate table, I will immediately tell you if I will use it in a synthesis or not

Happy Chinese New Year

@Zhe Haha. Well my current project would probably fail that test

@orthocresol That just means it's bad for synthesis exercises...

It doesn't mean it's a bad project

I have yet to be convinced of its utility in real synthesis.