tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (My question was closed - why?)

Kevin Buzzard comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9814)

Kevin Buzzard — Sun, 24 Oct 2010 01:11:08 -0700

@Ben: http://xkcd.com/378/

Ben Webster comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9810)

Ben Webster — Sat, 23 Oct 2010 16:44:03 -0700

God bless Emacs, the thermonuclear word-processor. And people wonder why I still insist on using it.

Harald Hanche-Olsen comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9747)

Harald Hanche-Olsen — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:33:41 -0700

Emacs (of course!) has M-x morse-region and M-x unmorse-region. Though it uses a single slash to separate letters within a word.

.../--- ../- -/-.--/.--./../-.-./.-/.-../.-../-.-- --././-././.-./.-/-/./... ---/..-/-/.--./..-/- .-../---/---/-.-/../-./--. .-../../-.-/. -/..../../.../.-.-.-

Harry Gindi comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9741)

Harry Gindi — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:31:10 -0700

mostly just Harry trying to draw attention to himself

False. I wanted people to see my joke about flag semaphore.

jbl comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9740)

jbl — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:21:38 -0700

It's Morse code. You haven't missed anything interesting -- mostly just Harry trying to draw attention to himself. Translation available here: http://morsecode.scphillips.com/jtranslator.html (and doubtless elsewhere, too).

Harry Gindi comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9739)

Harry Gindi — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:21:32 -0700

.. / .... .- ...- . / ..-. .- .. - .... / - .... .- - / -.-- --- ..- / .-- .. .-.. .-.. / ..-. .. --. ..- .-. . / .. - / --- ..- -

I don't know what it is, but it's fun!

Will Jagy comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9738)

Will Jagy — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:10:56 -0700

Harry, Nate, Richard, I don't understand the joke,or is this Morse code?

Richard Dore comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9735)

Richard Dore — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 10:55:09 -0700

.--. .-. --- -... .- -... .-.. -.-- / -. --- / --- -. . / -.-. .- .-. . -.. / . -. --- ..- --. .... / - --- / ..-. .. --. ..- .-. . / --- ..- - / .-- .... .- - / -.-- --- ..- / ... .- .. -.. .-.-.-

Harry Gindi comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9717)

Harry Gindi — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 22:04:54 -0700

.. / .- -- / ... ..- .-. .--. .-. .. ... . -.. / -. --- / --- -. . / -... ..- - / -. .- - . / .-. . .--. .-. .. -- .- -. -.. . -.. / -- .

Scott Morrison comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9712)

Scott Morrison — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 21:07:44 -0700

I'm late to the party, but I just wanted to reiterate a few things that came up.

Providing motivation for your question, in the sense of explaining why you personally want to see an answer to the question, is not essential, but on the other hand extremely helpful in getting people interested in helping you.
Providing your real identity is not essential on MathOverflow, but at the same time strongly encouraged. For one, people are much better disposed towards real people than towards pseudonyms on the internet.

In both cases, going that unnecessary extra mile also makes up for all sorts of sins: asking a slightly confused question, having a "bad attitude" in some way, etc. Finally, it's a well established custom of moderators to come down more heavily on bad behavior of anonymous or pseudonymous accounts; you can avoid this by telling us who you are!

Shevek comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9685)

Shevek — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 14:34:18 -0700

Hi Anixx. There is no conspiracy against you nor against questions related to indefinite summation. People were simply unimpressed by your confrontational attitude, which you are continuing to pursue. Any prejudice against you has come about from your own actions. Take some responsibility. Other than that, I wish you the best.

Anixx comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9684)

Anixx — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 14:15:16 -0700

...hmmm why to write an article, people? I just tried to answer a question as best as I could. This piece does not worth an article. Even if I do, what would it change? What really concerning here is the intention to impose a ban on the general topic related to indefinite summation. Not to say the attitude of prejudice towards me unless I disclose my identity (expressed in a form very hinting to an ultimatum).

Will Jagy comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9683)

Will Jagy — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:48:29 -0700

Thank you for your understanding, Andrew. For what it may be worth, the idea of mentioning Wolfram came from a post by Pete L. Clark on another thread, something about a talk he heard, which for Pete was initially mild evidence in favor of the suitability of the topic for MO.

Andrew Stacey comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9682)

Andrew Stacey — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:36:29 -0700

I do not have a problem with Will's post. It seems clear to me that Will is not speculating about Anixx's real identity, but explaining why in this case, Anixx's choice of remaining pseudonymous counts against him/her for Will. Whilst I would never have guessed "Wolfram employee", my feelings on this matter are broadly in line with Will and Mariano. It is not that I suspect a pseudonymous/anonymous user of having a shady background, but that, for me, MO is a place to interact with other people in my trade - mathematics - through the medium of mathematical questions. Without knowing even a hint of a name, I find it hard to empathise with the other person.

This doesn't mean that I go round speculating wildly about the other person's identity, but I don't see Will doing that: "My best guess" does not convey, to me, the impression that Will is acting on this speculation nor that he is trying to persuade others of the correctness of his guess (indeed, his post is full of "in my view"-type disqualifiers!). He is trying to explain why he might have voted to close Anixx's question and suggesting ways in which Anixx could remedy the impression Anixx made on Will. It is up to Anixx to decide whether or not Will's good will is something worth having. It is also worth noting that Will's main suggestion is eminently reasonable: write a short article.

So in my view, Will has nothing to apologise for and has, again "in my view", gone much further than I would have done to try to show Anixx how he or she might go about reversing the initial bad impression.

Will Jagy comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9679)

Will Jagy — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 12:40:44 -0700

Noah, apologies. Will.

Noah Snyder comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9678)

Noah Snyder — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 12:37:16 -0700

Indeed I do not approve. Speculating about real identities of psuedonymous people is something that should be discouraged.

Will Jagy comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9677)

Will Jagy — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 12:20:40 -0700

Identity or credentials are not required by any policy of MO itself. I spoke for myself and I gather you are not impressed. For that matter we are discouraged from speculating on the identity of users. Again, that was just me. There really are MO policies but they are pretty mild. You can laugh at me all you like.

Although it is not what I want to happen, I suggested a means whereby your future questions might remain open, a method that I think has a chance of working, and does not require you to reveal your secret identity. Do it or not, nobody else was going to make the suggestion. Everybody is married to the idea of keeping both questions and longer discussions on site, where the committee-style format tends to expand disputes instead of shrink them. If you prefer to continue arguing in comments and on Meta, I think things are going to stay roughly the same as they are now. If you want to make an extra email account with a pen name and write to me, go ahead.

Again, MO made no accusations, I characterized the appearance of things, and my guess is the others do not approve of my having done so.

Mariano comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9676)

Mariano — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 12:05:56 -0700

(I prefer when people disclose both identity and background; the first, because I prefer to interact with individuals; the second, because it makes it considerably easier to interact with people, specially in the context of asking and answering questions (I would have thought this last part to be pretty much self-evident...))

Anixx comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9675)

Anixx — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 11:55:38 -0700

Wow! Now I am accused of being a Wolfram employee! This is hilarious. And even if this was true what's wrong with it? Are you afraid I am pushing wrong/biased mathematics here? Also I am asked to disclose my identity and background... Why? Why you cannot judge based on my answers/questions alone without knowing my credentials? Well if disclosing credentials was required by the policy I would of course do it but now after such accusations this seems unreasonable.

Will Jagy comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9671)

Will Jagy — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 10:48:13 -0700

Anixx, let me suggest something: write up a document in the style of a mathematics article preprint, say 5-10 pages, with **published references,** that explains two things, which are (A) in what ways your answer to the original $\tan x$ question is correct as understood by mathematicians rather than engineers, and (B) why mathematicians should be interested in this topic. Place this document on some website and supply the link in this thread.

Right now you are arguing in an immediate responsive manner and on personal authority. That is not how mathematicians should fight. We prove, and when we appeal to authority we give references.

That being said, and more about me, I thought one question on indefinite sums ($\tan x$) was more than enough. I am about as strongly anti-engineering as anyone on this site. If you can make your case with me, you can satisfy anyone. And again, this is me, I definitely give less credence to anonymous/pseudonymous users. At the moment, my best guess is that you and decomwe are Wolfram employees pushing an agenda, or employees of a competitor. And this gives me a very negative impression. Nobody else is going to mention this because anonymity is a precious right on this website, the concept has been tested in many ways. But if you wish to fight based on your personal authority and will not give your correct identity and background, I do not give as much weight to what you say. Your best enjoyment in all this might be to just send Herman Tulleken email, you share interests and standards for correctness.

Still, the coin of the realm is the ability to write a mathematics paper, although so many users are too young to have ever submitted one. Write up something for people who have never attempted an indefinite sum, and will not ever be looking at wikipedia for definitions.

Harry Gindi comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9668)

Harry Gindi — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 10:14:53 -0700

- . .-.. .-.. / -- . / .- -... --- ..- - / .. -

.. - / .. ... / ..-. ..- -. / - .... --- ..- --. ....

- --- --- / -... .- -.. / .-- . / -.-. .- -. - / -.. --- / - .... .. ... / .. -. / ..-. .-.. .- --. / ... . -- .- .--. .... --- .-. .

Nate Eldredge comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9666)

Nate Eldredge — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 09:33:44 -0700

- .... .- - ... / .--. .-. . - - -.-- / .--- ..- ...- . -. .. .-.. . / .... .- .-. .-. -.--

Harry Gindi comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9664)

Harry Gindi — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 08:52:14 -0700

@Anixx: You completely missed the point of my comment...dotdotdotperiodperiodperiod

... --- ...

.. -.. .. --- -

WillieWong comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9662)

WillieWong — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 08:50:06 -0700

@Harry: looks like we have to add "motivation" to the list of words mathematicians use differently from everyone else

Anixx comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9661)

Anixx — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 08:28:20 -0700

@ Harry Gindi indeed my motives were questioned.

jbl comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9660)

jbl — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 08:26:48 -0700

@Harry: could be. Actually, it seems that a lot of Anixx's unpleasantness is rooted in low-level misunderstandings -- for example, in the comment left at http://mathoverflow.net/questions/42625/what-is-so-special-with-one-bit-of-information on 2010-10-19 15:12:19Z UTC, Anixx doesn't seem to be able to understand Alex Bartel's comment (even with further explanation), and look at the number of pixels spilled at http://mathoverflow.net/questions/42550/find-a-closed-form-for-sum-k1x-1-a1-k-closed on the question of starting the sum at 1 instead of 0. (Honestly, though, these don't look to me like language difficulties, they look to me like no meaningful attempt has been made to understand the comments being responded to.)

Anixx comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9659)

Anixx — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 08:26:20 -0700

@ Mariano what you said is also interesting but my point is that one can construct a function which difference is tangent on an interval which is greater than a unit interval. I.e. I meant it is possible to construct a function which would be the antidifference of tangent on a range of length pi, the maximum range at which tangent is continuous. I think such function can be obtained from the solution I proposed by carefully choosing suitable values of a multi-valued function.

Harry Gindi comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9657)

Harry Gindi — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 08:18:31 -0700

@jbl: I think there is a language disconnect here, where the OP is understanding the word motivation in the sense that we're "questioning his motivations" not "information that will give the reader a reason to care."

jbl comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9656)

jbl — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 08:07:27 -0700

Anixx, you asked for an explanation and I provided you with one. Of course, this is a product of my personal perspective, and I'm not particularly interested in debating the details of it. I think that you would be better-served trying to adapt to community norms here rather than trying to fight those who give you their input.

Mariano comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9655)

Mariano — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 07:27:22 -0700

If $f(x)$ is equal to $-\tan x$ in a small interval and to zero outside of it, then the $f(x+1)-f(x)=\tan x$ in some interval. This can be fixed to be piecewise continuous and still satisfy $f(x+1)-f(x)=\tan x$ in some interval.

This cannot be a solution to any interesting problem.

Anixx comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9651)

Anixx — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 06:32:58 -0700

Well I meant that it is possible to construct a continuous function which difference gives tangent on one range of the real axis at expense of being different from tangent on the other ranges.

Anixx comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9650)

Anixx — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 06:22:34 -0700

@ jbl Where do you see any motinvation in other questions, including the mentioned http://mathoverflow.net/questions/41011/what-is-the-indefinite-sum-of-tanx? There is nothing at all. Unlike me those autors do not say a word about motivation ant their motivation is not questioned. Regarding the answer of Oleg Eroshkin why did you conclude that I do not accept it? I did not comment on it, it is a deal of the question starter to accept answers. Anyway, I am sure it is possible to construct a function which is at least piece-wise continuous and which difference is tan(x).

Harry Gindi comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9648)

Harry Gindi — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 05:08:05 -0700

Inversely, purposely wrecking wikipedia is sufficient motivation for having a thread on MO.

jbl comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9647)

jbl — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 05:03:27 -0700

Anixx, your attitude is confrontational and unpleasant and your question is poorly motivated. The main differences between your posts and the other post you're complaining about include the politeness of the author, the attempt to provide motivation and a clear description of what was sought, and the willingness to accept the meaningful, correct answer of Oleg Eroshkin. A 2-second search for the word "wikipedia" will demonstrate that "improving wikipedia" is not sufficient motivation for having a thread on MO kept open (and thank goodness!).

Anixx comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9641)

Anixx — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 02:26:21 -0700

Improved.

Anixx comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9640)

Anixx — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 02:15:47 -0700

Okay. By the way, reopening this particular question is not as important as preventing ban on the general topic about finding indefinite sums.

Andrew Stacey comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9636)

Andrew Stacey — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 01:52:48 -0700

You should improve the motivation section before it is reopened. You can edit questions even if they are closed.

Anixx comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9635)

Anixx — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 01:42:18 -0700

I the case it is reopened I will improve motivation section. Is motivation to improve Wikipedia sufficient enough?

Regarding "closed form" I found many questions here askeng for a closed form solution. I could not imagine this would make any objections.

Qiaochu Yuan comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9633)

Qiaochu Yuan — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 01:31:24 -0700

Your attitude in the comments was less than stellar. But I agree that this question should not be closed if other similar questions weren't, and I've voted to reopen. I still think you should narrow your definition of closed form if you want anyone to actually answer this question.

Anixx comments on "My question was closed - why?" (9631)

Anixx — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 00:25:45 -0700

My question here: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/42550/find-a-closed-form-for-sum-k1x-1-a1-k-closed was closed dispite the fact a completely similar question by another person here: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/41011/what-is-the-indefinite-sum-of-tanx was not close\d and received 7 votes. Please tell me why do you close only my questions?