tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed ("What is the best *general triangle*?") Sun, 04 Nov 2018 12:58:53 -0800 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/ Lussumo Vanilla 1.1.9 & Feed Publisher Scott Morrison comments on ""What is the best *general triangle*?"" (21991) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1582/what-is-the-best-general-triangle/?Focus=21991#Comment_21991 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1582/what-is-the-best-general-triangle/?Focus=21991#Comment_21991 Sun, 05 May 2013 21:21:41 -0700 Scott Morrison I hope that if there is the slightest possibility of a question being reopened, that no one will attempt to delete the question. Personally, I would far prefer to see additional controversial questions surviving than that sort of escalation of conflicts in the moderation process.

]]>
geraldedgar comments on ""What is the best *general triangle*?"" (21977) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1582/what-is-the-best-general-triangle/?Focus=21977#Comment_21977 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1582/what-is-the-best-general-triangle/?Focus=21977#Comment_21977 Fri, 03 May 2013 06:55:47 -0700 geraldedgar Perhaps some people think that it must be deleted as the only way to prevent re-opening. And others think it must be re-opened as the only way to prevent deletion.

]]>
François G. Dorais comments on ""What is the best *general triangle*?"" (21976) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1582/what-is-the-best-general-triangle/?Focus=21976#Comment_21976 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1582/what-is-the-best-general-triangle/?Focus=21976#Comment_21976 Thu, 02 May 2013 19:27:17 -0700 François G. Dorais In view of Goldstern's answer, this question shouldn't be deleted.

]]>
Daniel Moskovich comments on ""What is the best *general triangle*?"" (21975) http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1582/what-is-the-best-general-triangle/?Focus=21975#Comment_21975 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/1582/what-is-the-best-general-triangle/?Focus=21975#Comment_21975 Thu, 02 May 2013 18:39:55 -0700 Daniel Moskovich This question was closed, and now has 2 delete votes and 3 reopen votes (and I don't recall such a thing happening before). My personal opinion is that it is an interesting question- the question of what is a "random" object is quasi-philosophical, but such questions are what motivated ideas like Kolmogorov complexity. Conversely, although it might be a fun philosophical question to ruminate about, it isn't the greatest of MO questions. Is this question acceptable?

]]>