@NikhilKumarSingh There is a deleted answer. Notice that if you click on active today it will go to the post with last activity and you'll get this link mathoverflow.net/questions/403395/… - at the end of the URL you can see that it's an answer.
Also if you see that post in some list sorted by recent activity, you can see "modified 17 hours ago by Carlo Beenakker". I do not see any such activity on something that wasn't deleted.
10k+ users and moderators have it easier - they can actually see the answers which were deleted on the page with the question. Mere mortals as you and me have to rely on various tricks to find out whether there is a deleted answer.
You can get the list of deleted answers to a given question also from SEDE - but they will appear in the list only next week (after the next update from SEDE): data.stackexchange.com/math/query/845040/…
As I said, it returns nothing at the moment - if Carlo Beenakker's answer is still deleted the next week, it should be in the list after the next update of SEDE.
This question is protected, and the box at the end says: "To answer it, you must have earned at least 10 reputation on this site."
What does this mean?
I am asking because I am currently shown as having 102 reputation but I cannot see the button to write an answer to the question. Maybe the wa...
Clarified version (for original to which comments refer see below):
At the point of writing the meta question OP had 102 points, but these 102 points included the association bonus of 100 points.
It is by design that the association bonus is not taken into account (see the meta.SO question Wha...
You should check whether quid's (user9072's) answer gives you also answer to this.
That's basically my understanding. At least, that fits with what quid wrote there:
> The current case however shows an interesting coner case, in that OP had had a lot more than 10 points of contribution to this site over time but lost/used them via a bounty (and possibly a couple of them via casting downvotes, too).
> That they still cannot answer a protected question in my opinion goes counter the idea of protection. It is not clear to me if leaving this corner case is also by design (perhaps for convenience of the implementation) or was so far ovelooked. In any case I think the documentation likely should be clearer here.
Clarified version (for original to which comments refer see below):
At the point of writing the meta question OP had 102 points, but these 102 points included the association bonus of 100 points.
It is by design that the association bonus is not taken into account (see the meta.SO question Wha...
