« first day (2420 days earlier)      last day (2078 days later) » 

3:36 AM
@amWhy @XanderHenderson @CarlMummert @Shaun @TheSimpliFire: This answer is totally wrong, and should be deleted. Already people have pointed out what is wrong but this user has a history of not fixing/deleting wrong answers.
 
4:09 AM
I guess 'damn' is a banned word?
I noticed a comment (admittedly with some frustration) was deleted from one of my answers.
 
Regarding how comments are deleted, as far as I know they can be automatically deleted due to banned words, or deleted if enough users flag it as offensive, or deleted by a moderator. I don't know which words are banned. Just avoid words that are likely to be offensive to many people. If you think your comments have been deleted unjustly, you can ask the moderators in the Mods Office.
2 messages moved to trash
 
I don't mind really. I was answering a question and the OP steadfastly refused to perform a straightforward computation so I needed to communicate the extent of my frustration.
 
@copper.hat Yea that happens. And if you think the question is a poor one, you can post it here for others to look at it.
 
I was just surprised, damn seems fairly tame, certainly in comparison to some of the invective I am capable of :-).
The question was fine, but I gave a simple counterexample and the OP refused to believe the computation. I make plenty of mistakes, but this wasn't one of them.
I was just curious about the damn. I have used definitely banned words in the past, but thankfully Daniel zapped them first.
Actually, of all the stack exchanges, I like MSE the best.
 
4:28 AM
@copper.hat I understand. I do consider "damn" used colloquially as not that bad (because it has other meanings such as "to denounce or criticize severely" and it has been used as an interjection for a very long time with no hard feelings).
 
Folks are pretty reasonable here.
 
But better to stay on the safe side. =)
 
Unfortunately the other side is so attractive :-)
 
Lol.
 
I met someone from the Internet once a year or two ago. As I explained to my wife, it wasn't what she might be thinking, it turned out to be a fellow from MSE :-).
I have an MSE T-shirt, unfortunately it ripped the first time I wore it :-(.
 
4:33 AM
Sad.
 
My kids won't let me wear it either :-(.
 
Lol!
@amWhy This poor post is a stubborn one. And it seems some people have a weird obsession with mysterious answers that drop from the cleαr sky.
 
Yves?
 
No if you click the little arrow to the left of my message you will see the message I'm replying to, about some complicated integral. Some people are obsessed with complicated integrals and their evaluation without proof.
 
Thanks!
 
I think they pale in comparison to the 'do my homework for me' ones?
 
@copper.hat Yes. But still, I find it pointless and a little disingenuous to not explain why on earth they want the value of that integral.
 
Perhaps some convoluted rep. accumulation?
 
@copper.hat That's an interesting hypothesis...
 
I like von Neumann's line: In mathematics you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
I guess I am used to MSE :-). Inasmuch as it resembles a microcosm of life...
 
5:38 AM
^_^ @amWhy @XanderHenderson @Shaun @copper.hat
For more, see:
 
6:02 AM
Everyone is asleep, and I'm fresh out of delete votes.
 
7:51 AM
The OP suggested reopening (or changing direction of the duplicate) for the question 1656686: How many rectangles can be observed in the grid?.
There was a brief discussion about this in the main chatroom, starting here: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/46453443#46453443
I thought it might be worth mentioning it here, in case some other users have something to say on this topic.
 
@MartinSleziak , thank you.
 
This post is also related, the question asks about square grid, the answers are dealing also with rectangular case - 178693: Analysis of how-many-squares and rectangles are are there on a chess board?. (This one has 25k views - compared to 10k views of the question mentioned above.)
I would not be surprised if somebody found more similar questions/possible duplicates.
I should probably have mentioned in connection with the question 1656686 that it was several times in the reopen review queue - see the timeline.
 
@MartinSleziak , thanks, I think this post should be reopen.
 
 
4 hours later…
12:04 PM
No-effort HNQ. It is trivial to evaluate each expression one by one to figure out where the equality claimed is false.
 
@XanderHenderson But the review was good.
 
@DanielFischer Surprise surprise.
 
12:22 PM
@DanielFischer That, at least, is heartening.
 
@XanderHenderson Okay okay. Go through those above first, then later move on to your list. =)
 
I've been through the ones above.
I think I've dealt with all of them
right... time to go
 
@XanderHenderson Ok see you!
 
 
1 hour later…
2:39 PM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Offensive title detected, potentially bad keyword in title: Go f*uck off y'all ✏️ by Álvaro on math.SE
 
2:50 PM
:46461666, @DanielFischer I would hope in your handling of this you did more than a simple roll-back.
 
So would I.
 
@DanielFischer Good to know :P
 
3:06 PM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted user: Is this function continuous? tau_e ✏️ by Álvaro on math.SE
 
Oh, my, and Alvaro even got the chance for a "do-over" on top of it, with all comments erased, after his use of profanity?
 
3:53 PM
Me thinks the sheltering of "new contributors" by mods likely is going a bit too far...
 
4:22 PM
Hi, @quid!
 
Helle @amWhy
 
4:33 PM
Regarding the just preceding comments @amWhy, as Daniel said there was also some reaction by the mod-team. That after the fact things are cleaned up seems useful to me. In my mind there is not much point in drawing attention to the fact some user used profanity.
 
@quid Except that it doesn't allow such a user to experience consequences from their peers.
At least the question has been closed. And the downvotes remain, until users check out what horrible question garnered > 10 downvotes, look at the context-less post, and cast pity upvotes because they think other users went overboard on downvoting the question they see now, (and not the question that was downvoted), plus absent any comments reflecting the askers attitude. Sanitize things if you must, but I think, wrt the post in question, it should have summarily deleted.
 
@amWhy there was a clear reaction, as you explain, which is good. On the summarily deleted. We do not delete mathematical questions as a reprimand (except maybe if it evades a ban). The current one should likely be deleted down the road because it is bad in it's current form. But commonly moderators do not rush that process.
 
4:49 PM
@quid I understand the resistance of a mod to delete out of hand. However, to shelter an offensive user from consequences they would face and have faced for their rude and profane use of this site, to give them a slap on the hand, and let them "start over" with the PSq they started with, is in fact "sheltering" the user. Warning: Oops, you used a bad word: wrist-slap. But you can still get and answer to your PSQ and we have helped enabled you to get an answer by ...
deleting comments asking you to show context, or comments for clarification, and also your two rude responses in comments, in addition to the profane title you replaced the original title. So you, who will likely merely create a new account tomorrow, perhaps even today, will still be able to get someone to do your work for you."
Perhaps, @quid, or @DanielFischer, you should also have reviewed this user's previous PSQ's posted under the protection of status "New Contributor".
I've actually noticed an influx of "new contributors" in larger numbers than we had, say two weeks ago. Incentivizing users to keep creating new accounts to garner the benefits of being treated with "kid gloves" in all ways could (and likely will) lead to "unanticipated due to group think about how wonderful the concept is" backlash, as sites realize the damage it is doing to the quality of the site, report back, and site wide stats verify the rapid increase in "new" accounts since the point
... since the point at which "Directive: We must baby newbies, even though they are not babies, and even though they are no longer children" was implemented.
I have no doubt that moderators were given specific announcements designed for just them: "No one who is a new contributor, no matter how foul their language, no matter how poor their question, and no matter how obstinate they appear in response to helpful suggestions from other users, should face any consequences like most users here for more than a week might face...
Just fix their mistakes, and pretend they didn't happen, and when regular users see something awry (wrt before and after the offensive turned innocent post,) inform them that "any offensiveness has been handled by the mod team". Probably with a sub-warning which doesn't count as a warning: "That was naughty of you to say. Can you try harder to be a good little boy or a good little girl?"
Ii couldn't help but notice that the offending user was still under the "umbrella/sanctuary" given to "new contributors". I have already witnessed inflated vote counts, and more answers, given to "new contributors", just to "Be nice", as though "being nice" has become perverted to ...
 
5:21 PM
@amWhy let me start to comment on this. I think that's much more the season (new academic year starting) than the introduction of that status.
 
..."Don't be honest! Don't tell the truth to any newbies, who are to be treated as children, after all. The objective is: whatever their imperatives, questions, or personal insults directed to "regular ole users", we must strive to make all new users, feel all warm and fuzzy inside".
@quid Alright. I'm zipping my mouth ... err ... sitting on my typing fingers :)
 
@amWhy there is no problem with telling the truth. The issue is about the form and the scope.
 
@quid Like to user A, joined 6 days ago who, say, becomes rude in comments below her 12th PsQ post in 6 days, still with a net score of 3, we say the truth: "Welcome user A!! :-) o/ There's a teeny-weeny problem with your comment to @reg_user. Try to be a good girl and don't do that again, okay? Have a wonderful day, User A :-) !!
 
For the scope, one should focus on the content and possibly the continuity of the account. However, it is neither necessary nor appropriate to try to teach life-lessons to other users or to add insult to injury. Let's take this comment (I add for others that it's not from you):
"That's no excuse for not following the rules of this site. Post your work or expect your question to be closed. And start working sooner next time."
The last sentence was not necessary.
This was actually a turning point to the conversation.
 
Compared to user B, who joined the site 8 days ago, hew becomes rude in comments below his 12th PSQ post in 8 days, with a net score of 3, and 6 of them already on hold. Then it becomes: "Face the music, user B. Being rude to other users violates the CoC! Consider this a warning! If it happens again, you are at risk of a suspension!! We expect you to follow the Code of Conduct [link]. I would seriously recommend that you improve your posts, else you may find that you will be unable to ask
... further questions from your account. I hope you take this warning seriously!"
 
5:40 PM
For the form, it can (and should be) clear and firm, but still deescalating and welcoming.
 
 
If one confronts users it will result in a confrontation. That's usually not an effective way of communication.
 
I'm merely saying that the cut-off between "new contributors" and "regular ol' users" is artificial, and arbitrary. Mistakes should indeed lead to opportunities for learning. But no one should intentionally upvote, just to "make the asker feel good", if the question is not good, as defined on MSE. A user or mod should not remain silent when encountering a "new contributor" who in two days has posted 12 PSQ's, with absolutely nothing in the way of context or effort in all 12 PsQ's, because
 
The comment you wrote there was good by the way. More to the strict end, and I'd left out the time-out bit, but it was clear and firm while not going over the top.
 
they have been told to be nice especially to "new contributors" which virtually insists that users not make new contributors sad, even if it is true that each and every question they've asked has been, or will be put on hold.
 
5:47 PM
@TheSimpliFire I've been around in stackexchange for as much as 6-7 times as you have been, and I think I've read all the arguments pro and against this or that kind of answers to this and that kind of questions. The OP had a rather difficult integral for a newbie and he already stated he tried int. by parts...which takes us nowhere basically. I'm no here to judge whether he already did enough to tackle a problem usually studied in middle-advanced undergraduate level. For me it is clear he needs to see clearly what can be done. There's the solution, may he benefit from it. — DonAntonio 9 hours ago
I personally don't think that writing 'I tried IBP' without explaining anything more counts as enough effort.
BTW, the question has 1 reopen vote?!
 
@quid I am not advocating that "being honest = being confrontational". To confront: speak directly to, isn't the same as what is often implied by the expression "being confrontational". But I also do not think every point one is trying to convey to a user needs to be "candy-coated", so that the asker misses the point entirely, leaves feeling warm and fuzzy, and only remembers something yummy.
 
@amWhy indeed they should explain to the new contributor that this type of question is not acceptable. At the same time the should try to do this in a way that does not make the other part "shut down" or go into "defense mode"
@amWhy no there is no need to "candy-coat" everything, but there is also nothing wrong with trying to be welcoming and friendly.
"Please format your questions using MathJax see [here for explanation]. Doing so will make your question easier to read, and it will increase your chances of getting an answer. (This time somebody else added the formatting for you but do not count on this happening every time.)" Is imo neither that candy-coated nor is it unwelcoming.
 
@quid I don't disagree with that, @quid. But I caution you where you begin to imply that the fault of a user using profanity on this site, lies on some supposed provoker. To argue, "the poor new user couldn't help themselves, all because the big bad wolf longer-term-user explained what is expected on this site, though perhaps was a bit too harsh in the words they chose to do so." Is again, treating a new user like a child with no will, no self control, and a victim who shouldn't be
expected to behave like a "decent human being", as well as we expect of the user who's been here maybe 2 days longer?
I personally find it offensive that a new user (just as likely, an old user using a new account) comes barging into our site ordering, via imperatives, what "we (answerers)" must do for them. So sometime the offending begins, from the start, from a "new" user expecting this site to be a "do my homework for me" service. No matter how nice you try to explain the nature of this site, and provide whole-some links to carefully parsed explanations, curated after months of consultation, there are
 
6:07 PM
@amWhy actually I insisted specifically on the fact that it is a problem that the comment contained something that has nothing to do with the site. This is what I find problematic, and it seems to me that this ticked the user of. Of course this does not excuse their use of profanity. But "And start working sooner next time." is just not needed. That's actually the flip side of no "kid gloves"; we don't lecture other users as if they were kids.
 
going to be users who come here feeling self-entitled, and upset with anyone who says anything to complicate their getting what they want.
 
@amWhy "imperative" is a tangent. All the time people see math problems being communicated in that way, so they do it too. (Or just copied it anyway.)
@amWhy that's also true. That for some users it will not make a difference how nice it is, because they'll get upset anyway. But for some others it will make a difference.
 
@quid No, I can sort of agree. But sometimes (often, I'd estimate), users wait to the last minute to begin homework, hence quite a few questions with asap!, urgent! Need help now! originate from that. The asker, if upfront about that, asks for hints, or politely asks for part A, so they can do Part B, I'm empathetic. But for users not taking responsibility for the position they are in, it's hard for me to empathize, and being told the truth: you shouldn't wait to the last minute, is true
about the one problem, but also true and relevant to addressing their sudden demand for urgency.
 
Not everything that is true needs to be said.
Especially as that other user is likely anyway aware it would have been better had they started earlier.
If it is not the site's problem how they manage their time, then this goes both ways.
 
@TheSimpliFire I've added some of the context OP gives from the comments into the body of the question. Like, it's still a low-effort post, but I think the question itself is sufficiently interesting to live on the site.
 
6:22 PM
@quid Sure, but I think it's fair game to inform such a user that answerers volunteer, so also work, have families, or other activities and due dates they face. And to come here, and withing one day ask three problems that are due very soon, that you want us to do for them, asap, that many users, quite understandably, might find your questions to be inconsiderate to this community, and the lives users/volunteers lead.
 
@amWhy while there is a problem with users feeling a sense of entitlement to getting answers, I do not really see this as that much of an issue when asking questions. If they ask very similar related ones maybe. But overall, they throw it out there, anyone is free to ignore them anyway. If I have no time, I won't answer questions here. And if I still do, it's really my own fault.
It's another matter if a user is solicited specifically. If I answer something and then get asked a clarification in a comment some hours later, and then the asker would get annoyed for not getting a timely response, then I'd say I have some justification for explaining them that I also have other things to do.
 
@quid I'm sorry, @quid. But I think no one should come here feeling (1) entitled to an answer to their question, with no effort from themself, and (2) No one is entitled to berate other users, as DonAntonio tried to do to TheSimplifier, based on DA'S sense of superiority. The responsibility is a two-way-street. With your approach, we end up with only a handful of users focus only on questions they can get posts, no matter what the quality.
All right I'm stopping here, @quid, because what you write on this merely upsets me more.
 
@amWhy re 1, the effort required is the effort to craft a reasonable post (with context etc). re 2, most if not all of that comment thread should like go. (I agree that this question should not have been answered but there is no point in inflating that comment thread).
@amWhy I am sorry if I up-set you, this is of course not my intention. From earlier conversations, I am convinced that overall we by and large agree. We just focused on different aspects in this conversation.
 
Nor any point that DA would speak so arrogantly. I'm sorry, @quid, but self-entitled users who expect an answer two minutes after they post a transcribed exercise do, indeed, impact this site. It is exceedingly relevant to the quality of this site. So don't tell me what is "tangential."
 
6:38 PM
@MikePierce I appreciate your efforts, but I don't see the benefit in the question being reopened. After all, an answer has already been provided.
 
@amWhy yes, that's why I deleted all of DA's comments.
 
@TheSimpliFire What's the benefit of it being closed though?
 
On the other point, yes, poor quality questions are a major problem. But the use of imperative itself, in my opinion, is not. There is certainly a correlation though. (However some people also have difficulty to write in English and therefore resort to simple constructs, especially if they encountered them frequently.)
Especially not if that use is "abstract" that is not directed at anyone in particular.
A lot of mathematics is written like this.
 
@TheSimpliFire Maybe I've got to get straight what it means for a question to be closed. I usually operate under the rule "closed (but not as a duplicate)" means "this needs to be improved or else it is not good content for the site and will be deleted."
 
Say constructs like: "Set $x=t^3$." "Recall that $x \ge 36$." are imperative and seem common to me in standard mathematical writing.
 
6:45 PM
@MikePierce From what I gather, this is what the OP has said: a) tried IBP (goes no further to discuss) b) exam question (little use) c) changed 360 to 2pi (not useful). I'm not saying that there's an actual benefit in it being closed, but it shoudln't be reopened either.
 
Yeah, for sure, the OP doesn't know what they're doing (I wonder why they took an exam which this problem on it then). But like, the natural state of a question is to be open, right? I think so long as it's okay enough to remain on the site, the it should be open (but you might disagree about it being okay enough to live on the site).
 
@quid I have no problem with a user transcribing an exercise, provided the transcription or copy and paste of an exercise, is not the only content of the post. Context, context, context. If an asker posts as much, I'm fine.
 
@MikePierce Of course, there's nothing stopping you from reopening, but what is the point in it being open? Like you say, the OP doesn't know what they're doing, so would allowing more answers to flood in be of much use?
 
This question should be closed.
I have a feeling that that user asks these to rep-farm? Firstly, their long list of questions like the one above, and secondly they mention 'Please, without full solutions, I'm not interested'
 
7:00 PM
@amWhy yes, I agree with this. All I meant to say is that the context might also be provided in imperative "Recall the definitions: " "Note the special case:" etc. I would not consider this in itself as a problem. Maybe that's rare in practice, but that's what I mean with imperative being tangential. Conversely "How to prove.." is in the end only marginally better than "Prove that"
 
7:27 PM
@amWhy I don't get the point of the rollback. It just included some info from the comments.
 
@amWhy Can you do me a favour and - for science - try to cast an undelete vote here? It shouldn't be possible since I deleted it after it was undeleted, but the page displays "deleted from review …", so I'd like to check if there's a problem.
 
@quid Surely the asker is capable of writing their comments in an edit to improve their post? Or are you saying that's another thing we "should do for" an asker? Let me get this down: Write an asker's title for them. Comment for clarification. Edit the post to improve the question by adding a comment or two that was replied to,
@DanielFischer I was told it could not be undeleted because a moderator has deleted the post.
 
@amWhy Thanks. That's good to know. So only a display glitch, no serious problem.
 
@quid Sorry, lost my train of thought. The best help, rather than embellish a post so that the asker doesn't have to work to get an answer, is to encourage the asker to edit to improve their post, positively reinforcing that their comment(s) below the post, if and when they leave them, would greatly improve their post if they would edit their post to include them.
 
@amWhy yes, but they may just not have realized that this was expected; thus @MikePierce showed them that is expected. (Mike could also have written a comment to ask them to include it, but that's a matter of style.) How are they supposed to know it now? You only rolled back and did not explain it. They might now conclude it was an inappropriate edit in principle.
 
7:39 PM
@quid How'd he show them that it is expected? By doing it for them?
 
@amWhy yes.
2
To observe more experienced ones, and to imitate is a common form of learning.
2
One could argue that leaving a comment is more direct or otherwise preferable. But what we have now seems clearly worse as it seems pretty unclear to me how the user possibly could infer that what they should do (should have done) is (re-)perform an edit that was just undone.
 
@quid Sorry, but the way you're treating askers' competence, Mike would have needed to say to the asker: I'm going to show you exactly how you can improve the post, using your comments in this thread. edit.....edit.... See, I clicked on the "edit" button, and copied your words from the comments, and then pasted them into your post in the order and way I think would help you most. Next time, when you ask a question, it's important to add such details in you question statement. "
...or, no matter. As you've learned today, someone will do that for you."
 
@amWhy the user had already performed an edit. To explain how to edit seems not needed.
 
I didn't see any such explanation from Mike.
 
7:48 PM
@amWhy could you explain me how you think your action improved the situation?
 
Well the rest of my comment holds. "See, I edited your post by copying your words from comments, then I clicked edit and pasted those words into you post, as I thought best for you. Next time, when you ask a question, ....". Plus, the "no need to learn; someone will do it for you next time you post."
Given Mike's versus my alternative, the user comes away, learning only: "someone will improve my post for me" versus "I guess there's no free lunch, and I may need to improve my post (aside: What a novel idea is that!!). If I'm not sure how, I guess I could ask. If I don't care, I won't bother asking."
 
@amWhy I think that the second conclusion is not very intuitive. They might also get away with the idea that it is inappropriate to include information that is already in comments into the post.
 
@quid Well then, let's stop playing the "What has the asker learned from this?" game, and recognize, it's rather paternalistic to think we are the biggest factor in what they pay attention to, and end up learning? I didn't start this game, quid.
On the one hand, you're charitable towards Mike's edit; they will internalize from Mike's example how to ask a question in the future. You're not terribly charitable toward the asker when you assume they are incapable of connecting point one to point two, when it comes to an alternative scenario. If a user can connect "what someone does for me" with "what I will do in the future", which you presume they will do, surely the alternative I describe is just as plausible.
 
@amWhy let me put it differently then. I now understand what you tried to achieve, thank you for this explanation. However, I worry that your action could be misunderstood and therefore I think it should at least be accompanied by an explanation to eliminates this risk.
It is possible that the user might conclude that there is no need to do this themselves because somebody will do it anyway. But it's not even that much work to include it right away, so that form of laziness seems a bit unlikely to me.
 
8:07 PM
There you go, @quid. I rolled back to Mike's question. Hope you are pleased with yourself. :|
 
Thank you @amWhy; I left an explanatory comment for the user to complement the action.
 
8:33 PM
@quid I still disagree with you, and Mike, and Mike's edit. But, I played out my expected "gendered role" by acquiescing.
 
@amWhy it is well known that "the smarter one gives in." :-)
 
9:02 PM
@amWhy Oh yeah, I edited because I like the question enough to want it to survive (open) on the site, not for the OP, and those comments should go in the body of the question so a future reader doesn't have to read the comments to know what's going on. (but I'm of the opinion that a good question should stay open even if it's a PSQ, which I think I'm in the minority on)
@quid I'm gonna agree with @amWhy about the whole "edit to show by example what a good question looks like" thing. Like, if a new user lurks on this site for even a minute, looking at previous questions, or similar questions, they should get an idea of what an "acceptable" question looks like. Anything short of this feels rude. It's not unreasonable to expect a new user to see what a good question looks like prior to posting their own.
TIL the work "ac·qui·esce"
@TheSimpliFire Also that reason makes me uncomfortable. Should we just close all questions that have an accepted answer since "it's been answered"? :P Like, since since there's no benefit in it being closed, I think it should be open for other users to answer it if they like. It'd be nice to see an elementary way of answering the (corrected?) question that doesn't utilize the gamma function. Then teachers could find this Q&A useful as a non-standard question to give their integral calc class.
But yeah, some users really just want their homework done, even if you basically hold their hand and walk them through it and try to encourage them to use the site properly.
I'll put ^those questions out for CRUDE's consideration, but I'm a little cranky at that user now so I won't interact with those posts further.
 
9:24 PM
@SimplyBeautifulArt open for deletion
 
Holy cow... what's been happening today, folks?
 
@XanderHenderson Welcome!
@XanderHenderson Here's the post in question in case you wanna get caught up.
 
Can I vote to delete?
Can we just delete everything, please?
 
9:47 PM
Go ask on the big MetaSE if they wouldn't mind deleting all MathSE
 
I don't see why not /s
 
I mean, we all ready have enough websites for math.
Like, we don't need to split MSE (as some have suggested).
Just migrate the good stuff to MathOverflow.
And everything else to Quora. :P
 
10:31 PM
@XanderHenderson lmao
 
11:20 PM
2 messages moved to trash
 
11:41 PM
@MikePierce something else on that question since you followed it, I mean now it's weird isn't it? The Q does not match the answer at all anymore, as OP changed 2n to 2n+1
Maybe with an odd one it's simpler?
 

« first day (2420 days earlier)      last day (2078 days later) »