tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (A poorly spelled but possibly worthwhile question)

Scott Carnahan comments on "A poorly spelled but possibly worthwhile question" (19443)

Scott Carnahan — Thu, 28 Jun 2012 00:29:10 -0700

The extra questions were deleted by the poster. As far as I can tell, the poster realized his or her error a bit late, and deleted the extras.

Asaf Karagila comments on "A poorly spelled but possibly worthwhile question" (19440)

Asaf Karagila — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 23:00:36 -0700

As Gerry said, there were several posts of this question. I actually voted to close only on two of the three. I guess that didn't work out as I planned... :-)

Will Jagy comments on "A poorly spelled but possibly worthwhile question" (19438)

Will Jagy — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 22:33:22 -0700

Right, it is questions 100820, 100821, 100822. I did not touch it either, but it is another question by a newcomer with no motivation, no sense of the OP's background.

Yemon Choi comments on "A poorly spelled but possibly worthwhile question" (19437)

Yemon Choi — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 22:32:31 -0700

Gerry's suggested explanation makes a lot of sense. Certainly, the issue of language apart, the question is not phrased as clearly as it should be. I will wait to see if the OP clarifies it, before deciding if I will vote to reopen.

Gerry Myerson comments on "A poorly spelled but possibly worthwhile question" (19435)

Gerry Myerson — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 22:16:42 -0700

I think this poster put up three questions, or possibly the same questions in three versions, in quick succession. Two of them seem to have been deleted, hence, no longer visible. It is possible that some poeple voted not so much against this particular question but against the behavior of the person putting the questions up. This may go some way to explaining the closure as "spam".

I'm just speculating. I didn't read all three questions closely, and I didn't vote on any of them.

Angelo comments on "A poorly spelled but possibly worthwhile question" (19434)

Angelo — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 22:13:19 -0700

What I find particularly puzzling is that it was closed as spam. Was it because of the misspelling? We have lots of users here who are not so comfortable with English, and anyone who has learned a foreign language should know that misspellings are much harder to detect is a language that is not your own.

I voted to reopen.

SteveLandsburg comments on "A poorly spelled but possibly worthwhile question" (19433)

SteveLandsburg — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:16:41 -0700

I too was baffled by the votes to close this one.

Yemon Choi comments on "A poorly spelled but possibly worthwhile question" (19432)

Yemon Choi — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:06:23 -0700

This question got a couple of downvotes and was closed, but none of those who voted to close left a comment to explain why.

I may have misread the question, but it seems to me like something known but non-trivial. That is to say, I think I know the answer, and in the discrete case I do know the answer, but only because this is a calculation I've seen in a few papers. On the other hand, rereading the OP's comment, it is not clear if the question I am thinking of is the question he or she is thinking of.

Anyway, would be interested to hear other people's thoughts on this one.