The Periodic Table

@pentavalentcarbon ah, I missed that. Thanks for the great edit! Also, I again realized I should not blindly trust CrossRef :(

?

the citation I appended at the end was auto-generated via a script that I wrote. It pulls DOI metadata from CrossRef, so...

ah neat...but the abbreviation is easy

yah

2:47 AM

Also, you committed a sin here: chemistry.stackexchange.com/a/98020/194

how?

The terrible-looking "newline without new paragraph"

Repent!

hehe. lemme fix that! though i don't understand why do they even allow us to do that. is there a situation where it's actually useful?

I don't think I've ever written anything using any tool or in any medium where I've wanted it.

There is plenty for me to complain about in Markdown.

well, it's just a small handy subset of HTML that achieves what we want it to and quite easily at that

(okay, definitely strictly not a subset! I meant a markup language like HTML but lighter)

2:53 AM

I guess some of the problems are due to HTML (no <u>underline</u>), the math stuff is the fault of the parsers...

is the math stuff faulty?

haven't you noticed that \begin{foo}/\end{foo} often works without $/$$?

that's not Markdown's fault because I think Pandoc does the right thing

yeah, I saw it earlier, but I guessed that was not faulty rather just some handy way to introduce Mathjax

I understand there are limitations, but...it's weird

$$\begin{foo}...\end{foo}$$ is not correct LaTeX depending on what foo is

Ah, this is rough...chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/98016/…

> How about not technically, trying to help teach my daughter and it's been a long time

@pentavalentcarbon I was hoping to setup canonical Q&As for these type of questions, now that I have a bit more free time (similar to Brian's RFCP meta post)

3:02 AM

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE

I am probably the wrong person to do it

@pentavalentcarbon woah, alright. I guess once we have several canonical posts we can close these homework questions as dupes instead

and sometimes, for people with non-academic background (like this father), the homework close reason feels a bit awkward and rather strict at least to me :(

It doesn't solve everything, because the questions may still receive answers and/or stick around, when really (I think) they should be deleted, but it's better than what we currently have

I agree, and I think most people would

@pentavalentcarbon yup, I guess it's much better. I've been thinking about that argument ("questions and answers are for collective knowledge, and the benefit to the asker is merely a side effect") for a while now and I am beginning to feel that effort is indeed "generally a bad metric"...

yesssss, come to ussssssss

so, how many users are on the team to abandon the effort metric altogether? From what I've seen I guess ortho, Mart, you, and almost me too. Anymore?

3:08 AM

I won't speak for Brian, because I don't know...his stance is probably "let's not implode on ourselves"

It's not just for "collective knowledge", but it's also the implementation of the low-effort that is terrible. I am sick of posting "CVers: please don't" comments all over the site. I see at least three close reasons misapplied everyday in the queues, whether it's opinion-based or unclear, and while debating over those parts is easier, debating to save homework closure is toughest

(example)

I think we want the same result, but are at odds with how to get there.

> I don't think we can expect learners to know the exact keywords to get the right answer from Google.

I disagree with you there. VTCing is silly, but I think that's a bad question because seriously, 5 minutes on Google.

Yes, that's more than 1 search on Google. Maybe it's 3 or 4.

But downvote...don't close. I'm not that altruistic.

@pentavalentcarbon I really go by the assumption that people don't know how to google at all. (whenever my home pc gives an error, instead of googling it and fixing it themselves, my family calls me, when all I do is this)

True, I assume the same, but my parents figured out Google is almost as good as me, and don't you think it's odd that it takes more physical effort to ask here than it does to use Google?

as in, this site is harder to use than Google

@pentavalentcarbon hmm I guess that's true as well

i guess spending five minutes on google should really be the way to go here

3:23 AM

> I know that the results I received are based on the QM used during calculations, but I shall express these results quantum mechanically.

wat

A: Change “for scientists, academics, teachers and students”

2

The current description implicitly excludes laymen from our target audience. Surely our site welcomes anyone with a good chemistry question or a good chemistry answer. SE Earth Science does not exclude laymen, by using "those interested". Therefore I propose the following short description, which...

interesting proposition

1. I understand the good intentions but that way lies dragons.
2. Does anyone _actually read_ that description? There is a general lack of reading by many...

@pentavalentcarbon 1. agreed, "anyone" is a bit too vague but... 2. irrespective of whoever reads it, if I tell people that our Q&A site is for "scientists, academics, teachers and students", they would assume that it isn't for laymen, which isn't good. the description should be as representative of our site's audience as possible

ok, I'll give you that

+1 great

A: Change “for scientists, academics, teachers and students”

3:46 AM

Chemical scientists are called chemists

Right

0

How about: Q&A for chemists, academics, teachers and students.

waiting for 100 something PES to output on the stderr be like:

and that does not count the fact that I need to manually look at them all since they are incomplete thus I cannot rely on AI to tell me where the mins are

1-06 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-07 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-08 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-09 D-01_01-0…

This make nice wallpapers

Oooooo I know why it take soo long: There are duplicated entries in the job list

@Secret you can/should script that

No, I mean the PES scans are incomplete for this batch, thus I cannot rely on simple nearest neighbour arguments to find the mins since it can find false positives

I VTC that statement as "unclear what you're asking"

4:02 AM

Uh, I am not asking a question, I am answering a question

lol

Now that makes me wonder: Do we have VTC for answers?

asking, answering...same thing...and no, the closest thing we have is flag as VLQ, then it enters the delete queue

Example case where finding minimal via comparing nearest neighbours don't work:

Here, a significant portion of the PES scan failed to SCF converge, thus giving that rough stuff in the middle. The minima seemed to be at 90 or 270 degrees, but it is not clear from this incomplete plot whether there is another minima near 180 degrees

A script that find minima by comparing nearest neighbours will miss out any 180 degree minima if any

I cannot think of any way to script this full PES inspection and judgement though given incomplete PES

4:24 AM

also in this example, 144 degrees will be mistakenly marked as minimum since its nearest neighbours are higher than it

5:10 AM

@AvnishKabaj don't know enough English but I guess that suffers from the same problem. "academics, teachers and students" of what field? I don't think the chemistry adjective carries over from the first noun over to the other three :/

Q: Will there be change in electronegativity difference in C-O and C=O?

5:27 AM

@GaurangTandon hmmm hmm

True that

I think this user is being excessively rude

Anurag Baundwal, India

192 1 11

I saw a rude comment way back

Something to do with him insulting the op for a homework question

I flagged it

1

Is there any change in EN difference in C-O and C=O. If yes, why? Does EN difference change if its bond is changed to single, double, or triple?

bond electronegativity dipole

This post over here

I've tried to make all of my comments objective

But he's still not replying normally

Should I make a meta post?

@AvnishKabaj This is not necessary and in such cases not the recommended practise. The moderator team is fully aware when posts/comments get rude flags. Trust us to handle it appropriately.

5:43 AM

@Martin-マーチン ok

@Martin-マーチン just wanted to mention I accidentally flagged Anurag's comment on the question as "no longer needed" instead of "rude". doesn't make a difference but I just let you know...

that and I've no clue if the OP even understands what the green checkmark is for... :(

@GaurangTandon It makes a difference, but not a big one, at least not with he's been posting already.

@AvnishKabaj iirc he's already had a 1-day suspension for that

@Martin-マーチン aye aye

7:28 AM

@GaurangTandon o.O really?

7:40 AM

12:22 PM

@AvnishKabaj he's gone for a month now

@pentavalentcarbon I agree with you that our aim is to build a library of detailed answers to every question about chemistry (that's what our Tour page says as well). I also agree that effort is generally a bad metric, and its implementation is terrible. However, I still feel uncomfortable receiving or answering such type of a question :( --^

mhchem

2:05 PM

@GaurangTandon Re chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/98014/…). Never mind. To be clear: I don't think my \ce is perfect. Some shortcoming are: overhead for short formulae $\ce{H}$ , font difference in running text.

@mhchem woah, I thought that is an advantage instead :P "font difference in running text." doesn't that immediately set apart the chemical formula from the running text?

so if I am reading through a line I know even from a distance what is a chemical formula and what isn't

@GaurangTandon Some people like it, some don't

I do personally like how the formulae stand out.

hmm

2:23 PM

@GaurangTandon Can't say I'm surprised

mhchem

@GaurangTandon One observation I find interesting is the typography of good printed books. And they fit their in-line formula in.

@AvnishKabaj i'm not at all surprised. dunno why you are

@hBy2Py I don't, and in LaTeX it doesn't.

@GaurangTandon can't say I'm surprised means that I'm not surprised

:P

haha ^^

2:30 PM

usingenglish.com/forum/threads/…

@GaurangTandon What rank are you expecting

Man if I were you I wouldn't be able to sleep tonight

@AvnishKabaj ಠ_ಠ

u duz nots finds folt in my Englisss

@AvnishKabaj every rank predictor is different; my current range (highest-lowest) is almost 500 lmao; i'll tell the correct one on 10th

@GaurangTandon holy moly

500!!

i said the range not the rank -_-

Oh

3:22 PM

@GaurangTandon If you want to make a nested numbered list, you need to explicitly include the line breaks for the inner levels. Markdown doesn't natively parse nested numbering.

@hBy2Py ahh I get it, cool

@Martin-マーチン It's a minor thing. I wouldn't mind at all if the fonts were harmonized.

@pentavalentcarbon I agree that "effort" is the wrong metric @Gaurang

A really good question could be asked w/o apparent prior research, and I'd be delighted to answer it.

(Case in point, my most recent answer)

4:45 PM

@hBy2Py great, so we have five people on the no-effort bus now :D

5:01 PM

@GaurangTandon So we're only outnumbered a few dozen to five, now.

@hBy2Py hmm that's tough... :O

I don't know the exact numbers

But this sort of argument has been attempted before, to little effect.

i guess I am forgetting but, has their been an attempt at getting rid of an effort-based close reason from the site? (<-- in an exact question)

Probably? Not sure how specific it's gotten

Part of the problem (this is a separate discussion that we've had, I think it was among me, Mart, ortho and Loong) is defining when a meta post arguing for a site policy action has reached sufficient consensus to move forward with it.

There's no formal mechanism built into the site programming to conduct 'authoritative' community polls.

@hBy2Py "Too much talking, too little action" springs to mind; i think we now have the mechanism to follow to decide when there is sufficient consensus on a topic, even though it's not via site programming

5:11 PM

@GaurangTandon Be prepared to be frustrated, as I was

...because?

None of the mods were willing enough to be a dictator sufficient to declare a consensus-definition policy as binding on the site governance.

And, having gone through all the discussion, I don't blame them.

On the one hand, they have the power to use.

On the other, if they use it in a way that ticks off a bunch of people, it could be bad.

Anywhere from getting harangued, to a bunch of people leaving the site, etc.

@hBy2Py I see...the discussions on the concerned meta posts weren't specific enough to the question being asked. The comments spiralled into further discussion, and on the overview, there didn't appear to be any consensus. Sort of something like this?

@GaurangTandon No, some of them stayed pretty specific.

There just appear to be widely diverging opinions among the community what the best approach is.

And the SE site policy structure doesn't provide a mechanism for unambiguously defining when a change to the state of things is "agreed upon enough"

e.g.: How many upvotes does a meta post advocating a policy change need to get before it should be implemented?

How many downvotes would negate that decision?

What about the upvote/downvote balance on a contrary opinion?

What about the strongly-worded comments to this, that or the other Q/A?

I guess the way to go forward should be to first ask the people on what their concerns are with removing any sort of effort-related close vote policy. First we can have a look at all their different concerns and then decide the way to go forward.

@hBy2Py indeed, the meta platform is a bit lacking in these areas. I wonder how they reach site related decisions on other SE sites in general :/

5:19 PM

<nod>, and THAT is the context where diffusion away from the topic at hand is really a pain

There are so many issues, all of which bump into one another, but that really are separate decisions, but that have knock-on effects on other decisions....

@hBy2Py <BIG_NOD>

@hBy2Py from my finite reading of the past meta activity here, I have found that to be an important problem that diverts constructive discussion of the topic at hand

@GaurangTandon Huge problem

I figure that's what you were hoping to do with the GH repo, is keep all the threads of discussion better segregated?