GENTLE - 2019-12-03

12:19 AM

@XanderHenderson We all should respect the time of each others and do not assume that others are acting not in good faith. I want let free anyone to act as he/she like. I would like that others aplly the same principles with me.

Xander Henderson

12:33 AM

@user I did not accuse you of acting in bad faith, so I am not sure of the relevance of your comment.

Feeds

1:18 AM

Zacky has removed Jack from the list of this room's owners.

Zacky

@Jack it works.

Feeds

Zacky has removed Zacky from the list of this room's owners.

Zacky

Even this.

Wait, it cant go back :D

user12692

@Zacky It seems that I am not an owner anymore.

user12692

@Zacky Neither are you.

user12692

1:26 AM

Only @MartinSleziak can add me back I think.

Zacky

Yes.. I wonder if Martin can remove himself now too, or if atleast 1 owner must exist.

Martin Sleziak

5:45 AM

@Jack That's not exactly true. Any moderator (from whatever site) has automatically all rights that a room owner has. Meta Stack Exchange: Is there a list of SE chat privileges, and the minimum reputation required for those privileges?

@Zacky There are many rooms without an owner - if you look around a bit. So theoretically, I could remove myself too - but then you'd need a mod to add you back.

Somewhat related: Why am I the owner of the chatroom? (As you can see, in some situations an owner can be added automatically by the software.)

Feeds

Martin Sleziak has added Jack to the list of this room's owners.

Martin Sleziak has added Zacky to the list of this room's owners.

Martin Sleziak

It seems that ownership in this room changed quite a lot.

user

7:36 AM

@XanderHenderson Are you kindly inviting me to leave? Sorry but I'll stay here till my contribution will be useful for some other users. From my side I make all my best to make the content of the site well organized and useful.

@XanderHenderson I enjoy the site a lot. I think that all of us could enjoy even more if you could spend more time to raise questions and give answers instead of discuss in chatrooms. Myabe we should avoid such kind of discussion here and try to discuss that topic in Meta.

@XanderHenderson Indeed I'm assuming you are in good faith. The only issue in your position from my side is that it seems that you expect that others act according to your rules, as you were depositary of the truth. Instead I don't expect that you act like me. You are free to act as you like but don't judge in a such negative perspective whi has ideas different from yours.

@XanderHenderson My typo, I mean: "I think that all of us could enjoy even more if we could spend more time to raise questions and give answers instead to having discussion in chatrooms".

Martin Sleziak

@XanderHenderson Actually, I think that MSE can be a reasonable place for one-on-one tutoring - suitable place for this is chat. There are many chatrooms where users sometimes ask mathematical questions.

But I certainly agree that the main site is not suitable for such purpose (one-on-one tutoring).

user

12:42 PM

@MartinSleziak To clarify I don't give answers as a one-on-one tutoring but I'm happy if an asker request that. In general I prefer give answers on the main platform in order to have a feedback also from other users and also let the answer at disposal for future readers. But it is just a matter of preference. Chat rooms are also a good way of course.

Please check these (note all question contain my answer but it is not a point to take into account for the possible undeletion): UN01, UN02, UN03, UN04, UN05

Xander Henderson

1:31 PM

@MartinSleziak Indeed, I had not been including chat in the above comments. It would be better to say that the main MSE Q&A site is not a good platform for one-on-one tutoring.

user12692

1:57 PM

The body of the answer you linked says (emphasis mine):

It depends; Look at the context of how they are asked.

You'll want to keep the question **if the wording provides another way for a search query to find the content.** It's a bit like a "see also …" entry in an index.

Delete it if the duplicate does not add terminology or alternate phrasing to find the question. It may not be worth cluttering up the system with this exact duplicate. There are several poorly phrased questions that will not direct traffic to us.

user12692

@MartinSleziak: do you know that why sometimes the formating **...** does not work in chat?

user12692

@MartinSleziak Thanks for that.

doppelgreener

3:15 PM

@Jack Markdown doesn't work in multiline messages. (With the exception of making them fixed-width, or adding a starting > to make it a quote.)

user12692

3:31 PM

>It depends; Look at the context of how they are asked.

>You'll want to keep the question **if the wording provides another way for a search query to find the content.** It's a bit like a "see also …" entry in an index.

doppelgreener

You want the > at the start of the first line only if you want a quote.

> like
this

> like
this

user12692

> It depends; Look at the context of how they are asked.

user12692

> You'll want to keep the question if the wording provides another way for a search query to find the content. It's a bit like a "see also …" entry in an index.

user12692

So it works now.

user12692

@doppelgreener Thanks for that!

doppelgreener

3:33 PM

You're welcome

user12692

3:48 PM

This one is ready for undeletion. I do not understand why those users so much want the post dead: math.stackexchange.com/q/3440989/9464

user12692

$f(x,y)=\frac{x^2y^2}{y^2+x^4}$ with $f(0,0)=0$ is continuous at $(0,0)$

user12692

To quote the post @ArnaudD. mentioned:

user12692

> You'll want to keep the question if the wording provides another way for a search query to find the content. It's a bit like a "see also …" entry in an index.

Xander Henderson

@Jack Do you actually not understand, or are you just using the phrase rhetorically in order to indicate that believe that those who have deleted the question are acting in bad faith?

Assuming the former: the question to which you have linked is a precise duplicate of another question. The deleted question adds nothing new to the discussion.

user12692

@XanderHenderson a precise duplicate of what?

user12692

3:56 PM

@XanderHenderson Your assumption is valid: not I do not understand seriously.

Xander Henderson

@Jack I assumed the former, meaning that I assumed you genuinely did not understand. I then provided an explanation.

As to what it is a duplicate of, please look at the one and only comment attached to that question.

I also notice that you spent some time editing the deleted question before asking for it to be reopened. By way of comparison, here is how I spent my last hour or so:

I went through the "Close" queue. Several of the questions there were marked as duplicates, but I felt that the dupe targets were in need of improvement. So I edited the targets in order to bring them up to snuff.

If it is your belief that the content of this question is important, but that the dupe target is, for reason, lacking, please feel free to improve the dupe target. I see no reason to revive the deleted duplicate.

user12692

@XanderHenderson Which "target" are you talking about? Do you mean this post?

user12692

Will be back later.

Arnaud D.

4:27 PM

@Jack How does the wording of that question provides another way to find the content ?

user12692

5:16 PM

@ArnaudD. I'm not sure which problem you are referring to. If it is the one just mentioned above, then the first sentence of your previous comment applies here:

user12692

in CRUDE, 7 hours ago, by Arnaud D.

@user "answers are different" is an acceptable reason to undelete or avoid to delete, but not to reopen a question. If a pair of question are asking the same thing, they are duplicates and one should be closed as such, no matter how many amazing answers either one may have. (This is meant in general, not just for the cases pointed out by Bill.)

Arnaud D.

5:38 PM

@Jack I don't understand what you're saying. I thought you wanted this question to be undeleted for the reason that "its wording provides another way to find the content". So I replied that I don't see why that reason would apply here (the posts don't seem very different to me).

If you want to argue that the answers are different and thus don't deserve to be deleted, I'm not really sure about that. One of the answers is already present in the linked thread, and the other two are essentially the same idea, and have certainly appeared before on similar questions (example).

user12692

6:22 PM

@ArnaudD. The "example" you linked is one that "has different wording" and the "the linked thread" gave nothing but a hint. I find these two posts are more appropriate for merging than deleting.

Arnaud D.

You mean merging this and this?

Robert Z

7:31 PM

Please check these: Q1, Q2

Bill Dubuque

7:43 PM

@RobertZ Q1 is surely a dupe - we have many like that

user

@RobertZ Both good questions and aswers in my opinion. It’s really a pity the unjustified deletion of all this good material.

Xander Henderson

@user Which do you think is a more inclusive way of expressing your point of view?: (1) It's really a pity that others are doing something unjustified! or (2) I disagree with the actions of others, and think it would be a pity if those actions were not reversed.

Perhaps I should flag your unnecessarily aggressive comment for violating the CoC...

user

@XanderHenderson Nothing aggressive in that from my side, both are just my opinions, for me this deletion are indeed unjustified. If someone has different ideas, they are free to act as them like. I don’t see why you react in this aggressive way.

Xander Henderson

You really don't see how that comment is aggressive? Really?

The fact that you, personally, do not understand how the deletion is justified does not mean that the deletion was unjustified.

user

@XanderHendersonThe aggressive behavior is to try intimidate users to express their idea. I’ve just expressed my support to the questions submitted by @RobertZ. Nothing else. I can’t give a justification to you for any thought I may express here.

Zacky

8:30 PM

U111,U112,U113

U114,U115

Bill Dubuque

U113 is a nice problem that is worth salvaging. Same for U115 (but I'm probably biased having answered that one)

Transcript for

$Mathematics$ GENTLE