@copper.hat if all the answers (and the closed post) are downvoted to a nonpositive score (and there is no accepted answer), then the post will be deleted by an automatic script. So in some sense, the downvotes is not really pointless.
It's one of my three open bounties, and got downvoted a while ago. I'm not able to see any scope of improvement, since the formatting is excellent, I've included what I've tried, and I've asked specific questions
There are plenty of equivalent questions (such as no $\max$ on unit disk) that are untouched (please do not chase these down too). i understand marking duplicates, i do not understand closing such questions without an apparent equivalent and losing the answer. are the folks making the judgement analysts? functional analysts? certainly not even slightly obvious from their mse activity. i appreciate the drive to improve the site quality, but this is silly.
@copper.hat Now that a duplicate had been found and posted in the comment, probably it is less important if it is closed as a duplicate or missing context.
@copper.hat Thanks. So I found this question by typing : "unbounded continuous function on unit ball", taking the first result which was a duplicate of a better post, and then going to that post : which is the one we need. This just emphasises how easy it can be to find duplicates sometimes!
Of course, it helped that I know enough analysis, so I was able to verify that Pacciu's answer was elementary and suited the OP as opposed to the one with the Tietze extension theorem, for example.
@epsilon-emperor Looking at the tags at that question, the tag analysis seems mostly useless. Since it is about box dimension, maybe dimension-theory-analysis would be suitable?
Of course, the tags do not influence that much how the question is received. But maybe you might attract people knowledgeable of the topic. (There are at least some people who follow this particular tag.)
@epsilon-emperor I haven't read the full question, but I notice that it is very long. If you can split it up into multiple shorter questions (while still providing sufficient context), then you could receive answers that only answer a part of you original question.
@supinf Thanks for the suggestion! I can split it - but I don't mind partial answers either. Moreover, a correct answer entails 50 + 10 + 15 = 75 reputation points, so isn't it okay for the question to be a little long?
Moreover, I imagine the answers would be much shorter
@Peter As an investigation of a functional equation that coincides with the totient function on the naturals, it's fine, though arguably it's less a question and more a request for discussion. It is quite fascinating that the OP carefully checks that the equation holds for positive rationals (only) and then proceeds to apply it to negative ones without any concern!
@copper.hat The question here was a PSQ plus an "I'm clueless" entirely empty of meaning. Why would you answer such a very low quality question, other than to gain rep? In any case, you are defying the EoQS, so stop complaining about dvs to your answers that violate, and instead, own the responsibility for violating the EoQS.
@OliverDiaz I was asking, specifically, for a dupe-target for a question which has been the subject of an un/delete skirmish. In general, it is better to use flags to indicate these kinds of things.
That is, if you see several related questions, and the answers to one could be copy-pasted to another, use flags to indicate this (in addition to voting to close as duplicate).
In any event, I don't have time today to look into the posts you brought up here---I have to get grades in today, and am behind where I want to be (though I am down to just one class to finish up).
I do not understand the point of deleting questions that are marked as duplicates when they contain an answer that is not included in the duplicate. Surely it is sufficient to mark it closed?
I'm feeling more and more inclined not to put in any more work on this site than mods put it. They get the credit, without the backlashes, for the work we do, and suffer because doing that makes us targets.
It's easier for users to target you me and other users voting to maintain quality, because most all of those who choose to attack us are cowards and fearful of doing the same to mods, given their powers.
@TeresaLisbon Yes, I understand. But even when writing an excellent answer to an acceptable questions, we are likely, at times, to get revenge down votes. To date, mods do very little to combat that.
@amWhy They don't , you are absolutely right. There's currently two classes of users on the site : mods, and OTHER users. No, there's a third class, those who are putting their site-lives on the line to help improve the experience of the site. I think we at least need flag priority.
@TeresaLisbon I sincerely hope so, but I pray, @Xander and @quid, and others don't screw this opportunity up but taking only minimal action, if any action at all. Then, folks around here will have learned... The bark has no bite. The EoQS is just a lot of hot air, but see, nothing happens....That outcome is not due to us, if it happens. It's due to the mods failure to follow up bad behavior with consequences.
@TeresaLisbon I figured they'd start with one day; if the need arises, the next suspension will be longer. But as far as I'm concerned, with all the evidence we've already provided to mods, and assuming warning were issued prior to any suspension, the suspensions should have been for 3-days to one week. I really do not think mods will likely keep "taking action with kid gloves" on the chronic offenders, for appearances sake, if nothing else.
@amWhy Yes, without doubt. Sadly the duration is a mere formality, otherwise if I told you and the mods that there is a user who answered 36 low quality questions across 2 months, then a suspension of one day would be like stealing pennies from a millionaire.
I made a typo or two or three. I am surprised, i.e., at how much mods are taking teeny tiny baby step actions against chronically-seeking-rep users, as compared to actions on others, And they risk never being taken seriously.
Well, bottom line is that if the EoQS is going to be enforced, we need more mods present on site, regularly, else they are literally throwing us to the wolves, @quid, @Xander, @moderationteam.
@TeresaLisbon I'm going to start keeping notes, with links, timestamps, recording the length of time my flags sit pending, actions resulting, if actions result, because even with helpful flags, more often than not, little is done save for slapping of a hand (wink, wink). .... etc. Because mods on SE hide behind secrecy and anti-transparency, and without good data to challenge them, they'll continue to "hand wave" away any accountability on their parts.
@amWhy Correct. Please let me know if you want me to do any tallying for you.
(vis-a-vis site related numbers).
I track users who have been EoQSed (loosely, admittedly, but I still do) so for example if you encounter a user I can let you know if you wish to leave a comment or to flag their low quality content.
@TeresaLisbon Sure! I think the more who track their flags, and the flags' outcomes, if any, and we pool that data....
@TeresaLisbon That would likely help. I think I've also covered the high rep users, but I'm less effective remembering answerers under 10k, and we have users chronically changing their usernames...
@amWhy Same here : I think the big fish are out of the way. Besides, I think that users are more likely to respond (note : not necessarily positively, but by respond I mean a change of behaviour) to suspension at a lower rep then at a higher rep.
@TeresaLisbon Indeed. There's promise, when such behavior hasn't been engrained for years. But why has not RI ever been suspended, like the Dr.S has been? He has, for as long as I've been on this site, written one line answers to pathetic PSQs. Position? Because he's on MO? .... I don't know. But there is a clear bias of mods who look the other way with respect to some users, that they fail to to grant other users.
@amWhy Graubner was awful, truly awful. As for the other : let's see, the problem is infrequent posting if I have to be honest. There were times when said user was prolific : but I'm now seeing 10-12 answers in the space of a week from said user. It doesn't rule out what they did in the past, but the low number means there's also very little feedback that can be given.
What worries me is the concern: what if nothing comes of the effort put into the EoQS, either because mods aren't around, or are still conflicted amongst each other, or for whatever, the "enforcement" never happens? It would lead too many users "laughing it off". And likely making matters worse than they were before Xander posted the EoQS post.
I've had 2 flags against said user accepted , on the same day. But that day was a few days back : if I have been missing questions of the user I'll have to see the delete queue more often!
@amWhy Can I pin this? It needs more visibility. I had a user ask me yesterday (or day before) where on Earth a couple of the other mods were. There are 10 of them, yet I see only a few here, and I see 4 or more on more MSE threads. Yes, if the mods are divided among themselves then the whole exercise is worthless.
@TeresaLisbon But no one every challenges him, never mods, users are too intimidated, the only person I've ever seen challenging him, which hurt me, not him.
@TeresaLisbon The mods typically respond (some mods work behind the scene???) How can a moderator moderate when they are not engaged in the site, up close? They may handle flags we cast. How can we trust them when they don't even set foot on this site?
That comes back to a visible response from the mods. The behind the scene working is kind of the issue. I've been spoken to about this, I can only hope the suspensions are the start of a crackdown.
@TeresaLisbon It's due to arrogance, which too many mathematicians share the trait. Not all, by any means; but too many, and they give mathematics a bad rap.
@TeresaLisbon I hope so too; I just get frustrated because I seriously wonder whether the mod team is up to the challenge. And as I suggested earlier, it feels like they are treating us as collateral damage.
@amWhy I understand : I credit MSE for keeping me humble, honestly. Some of the users I've met here have been gems. But yes, even professionally, some mathematicians (and some colleagues of mine) are quite arrogant. The whole notion of people from various levels not interacting with each other due to arrogance is well-documented. I recently explained to a fourth grader, how to find the area of a quadrilateral on a grid because the old sixth grade child wouldn't do it!
That's what arrogance can do!
(It wasn't a quadrilateral,it was a heart shape, but whatever)
The arrogance manifests itself on the site in two different ways : one is , of course, not responding to comments.
The second is people giving high level answers to questions where attempts are not necessarily of a higher level. This may not even answer the question that often!
@TeresaLisbon I know. One ultimate goal of mine is to publish my research on "A feminist philosophy of mathematics." I don't mean that like the olds "stereotype" of feminists as militant man-haters.
@TeresaLisbon Excellent points. The two you make. I think it also occurs when in not responding to comments, including follow-up questions from the OP, but also in sarcastic, diminutive replies to commenters, to askers below questions. I never understand why folks good in back think they are therefore superior to others.
@amWhy Correct. I'm so happy that I come from a background where I see little kids struggle with math and have to explain it to them : it puts you in a position where arrogance goes out of the window!
Where is the emphasis on cooperation? On helping students to learn, rather than handing them an answer because "they're too stupid to teach them how, pity them", etc. Unfortunately, for many in math, it seems their lifelong, and sole, "claim to fame" is "excels in mathematics", and they come here to keep getting affirmations about how smart they are.
Correct. What basically ripped that attitude out of me was school. Where I think, somewhere, sitting with struggling kids and understanding their math problems and helping them out was a great eye-opener.
@TeresaLisbon Indeed! When I was an undergrad, there was a student in the same year, and she was convinced she couldn't do math. I was working in the campus mathlab, and she came diligently day after day, to work, and when necessary, ask questions. By the end of the first year, she was looking forward to two more semesters in math. She started out wanting to be a nurse, but she was terrified she would fail on the math required.
She ended up graduating with a math major and certification to teach high-school math!
And, as we've talked about before, @Teresa, I truly think with some of the highest rep users, many of them retired, participating on this site helps them maintain a sense of purpose. How to encourage them to find that purpose in coaching more, except there too, there may be some who need to prove they're still "sharp."
@TeresaLisbon Great. Thanks for the rewarding chat!!
@amWhy A few suspensions have gone out. It is likely that more will go out in the future. I expect to be more active starting on Wednesday (I have errands on the other campuses to run tomorrow).
Regarding the length of time that flags are sitting, I (1) am very aware of the situation (the flag queue is quite large right now), (b) don't have the time to deal with it right now, and (iii) feel guilty and anxious about (b).
In any event, the plan has always been to give people a couple of weeks to no longer have the excuse "I didn't know any better!", and then start issuing suspensions.
There has been a lot of behind the scenes work done, but I know that this doesn't look like much from the outside.
