tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (Misleading titles) Sun, 04 Nov 2018 13:40:22 -0800 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/ Lussumo Vanilla 1.1.9 & Feed Publisher Scott Morrison comments on "Misleading titles" (3547) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3547#Comment_3547 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3547#Comment_3547 Sun, 28 Feb 2010 17:53:50 -0800 Scott Morrison Recall that upvotes give 10 reputation, while downvotes only take away 2. Just looking at the voting total for a question can hide a lot of reputation gain in contentious cases.

]]>
Jonas Meyer comments on "Misleading titles" (3522) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3522#Comment_3522 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3522#Comment_3522 Sat, 27 Feb 2010 18:03:44 -0800 Jonas Meyer
Added: Oh yeah, and when you're curious you can click the "Reputation" tab on a user's page. I guess the question only got 2 upvotes before being CW. But I don't care enough to investigate further. ]]>
Pedant comments on "Misleading titles" (3521) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3521#Comment_3521 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3521#Comment_3521 Sat, 27 Feb 2010 17:57:02 -0800 Pedant The user "Giant Laser Cannon" looks a bit odd. Discount the question mentioned in the starting post of this thread, which is community wiki. Then, this user has three upvotes on answers and three on questions, and this user accepted two answers. So this user would have a maximum of 65 reputation. My memory was that the user had more than 100 reputation. What happened?

]]>
LK comments on "Misleading titles" (3494) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3494#Comment_3494 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3494#Comment_3494 Fri, 26 Feb 2010 13:24:47 -0800 LK Pedant comments on "Misleading titles" (3493) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3493#Comment_3493 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3493#Comment_3493 Fri, 26 Feb 2010 13:17:59 -0800 Pedant Editing for mathematical content is ok. But, how about when you are a drama king/attention seeker type of person and repeatedly edits just for this purpose?

]]>
Qiaochu Yuan comments on "Misleading titles" (3488) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3488#Comment_3488 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3488#Comment_3488 Fri, 26 Feb 2010 13:05:46 -0800 Qiaochu Yuan Probably not. I think it's considered good etiquette for each edit to add something to the question - additional background, an example, a related question, that kind of thing.

]]>
Andrea comments on "Misleading titles" (3479) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3479#Comment_3479 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3479#Comment_3479 Fri, 26 Feb 2010 11:11:26 -0800 Andrea

If what GLC was worried about is keeping his question in view, that's what repeated edits are for.

Are unnecessary repeated edits to keep a question in view considered polite?

]]>
Ilya Grigoriev comments on "Misleading titles" (3464) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3464#Comment_3464 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3464#Comment_3464 Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:51:31 -0800 Ilya Grigoriev
By the way, he changed the title back. So, if you wanted down because of the title, you should probably cancel your vote. ]]>
Qiaochu Yuan comments on "Misleading titles" (3457) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3457#Comment_3457 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3457#Comment_3457 Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:19:58 -0800 Qiaochu Yuan Misleading titles should never need to be discouraged! The system already discourages them. If a title is misleading, the wrong people will read the question, so the people who might know the answer to your actual question won't read it. There is already considerable incentive in place, even without downvotes, for titles to be accurate so that the right people will read your question. If what GLC was worried about is keeping his question in view, that's what repeated edits are for.

In other words, I don't think a policy is necessary.

]]>
Harry Gindi comments on "Misleading titles" (3456) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3456#Comment_3456 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3456#Comment_3456 Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:43:43 -0800 Harry Gindi I think that it's making fun of the fact that community wiki questions with no mathematical substance get more views than real mathematics questions.

]]>
Pedant comments on "Misleading titles" (3455) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3455#Comment_3455 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/251/misleading-titles/?Focus=3455#Comment_3455 Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:28:49 -0800 Pedant Sometimes people use misleading titles to attract more attention. It was just done with this question.

It has the title "Using mathematics to improve environment", and the user is "Giant Laser Cannon", previously Lasergun, even earlier Laser.

This is harmless fun from a certain viewpoint. But it is childish behavior and should be discouraged in a serious forum. There were other instances also of misleading titles(from other users). So it might be a good idea to discuss and establish a general policy.

]]>