Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.


    It's not clear to me there's any benefit in worrying about the rate of reward of various activities. Good moderation is also important, but we don't give people points for deleting closed questions that are no longer of interest.


    One "feature" of SE 2.0 is that if you vote up too many answers in a row, the software badgers you to vote on some questions. The main consequence for me was that I stopped voting on physics.SE, but there is a chance that for others, it will lead to more upvotes on questions to balance out the lower reward.


    I have to say that I think MO has a very balanced voting customs. In the other hand MSE suffers in this aspect from lack of votes to many great answers and over-votes to much simpler answers which are really not that great.


    the software badgers you to vote on some questions

    Great, just great. I am so looking forward to being badgered by software.


    The badgering isn't all that frequent. If you're willing, the main effect is to get you to consider tapping the up arrow on a question once a day. I generally feel that if I like an answer, I should consider that I might have liked the question as well, and I always upvote anything I write an answer to, on the grounds that it was interesting enough to spend time on.


    Just out of curiosity, does down-voting a question get the software to be quiet? Or does it have to be an upvote?

    I think downvoting works too, if I remember correctly.

    I suppose the old bounties simply would not be transferred (I've seen sandbox and had experience with TP)

    The bounties don't show up next to the questions for some reason, but they do appear in the revision history:

    And you can confirm that José is awarded these reputation points by looking at the graph here:

    Just out of curiosity, does down-voting a question get the software to be quiet? Or does it have to be an upvote?

    Just tried this on the sandbox, and yes, downvoting works.

    Has there been a final decision on whether migration is going to take place? If so, is there any sort of time table?

    Yes. It's taken a surprisingly long time to get the legal stuff done (partly my fault, sorry), but hopefully it will be done in the next two weeks or so. More updates soon.


    Oh, take your time, Anton. :-)


    Ditto Asaf's comment. :-)

    • CommentAuthorMariano
    • CommentTimeNov 27th 2012

    By now we all own Anton a pool-sized glass of beer.

    No one should be submitted to «legal stuff», ¡poor soul!

    I have used both MO and Math.SE and I would prefer to use only one without fear of migration. One of my posts on Mathematica.SE was migrated to Physics.SE and I was out of my element.

    I propose a "ping" option under the "flag" button on all SE sites. If any member flags the OP with a ping request for attention by MO, the moderator of the current site creates an entry in MO meta that has a link to the question.

    Two things can happen: 1) MO members can vote to allow the migration or, better yet, 2) MO members can go to (say) Math.SE and answer the question. Even a terse answer works because it will trigger other answers by Math.SE members.
    are you seriously considering moving to stack exchange?

    This is a terrible idea! Please reconsider!

    I don't really understand your statement, testcomment. MO is a StackExchange site already. The discussion is about moving to the 2.0 platform. MO is currently on the StackExchange 1.0 platform.

    testcomment, it would be more helpful to the discussion if you explained why you think "this is a terrible idea."
    • CommentAuthorHJRW
    • CommentTimeDec 13th 2012

    And it would be even more helpful if you at least skimmed this thread and found out whether anyone has made your point already.

    • CommentAuthorTim
    • CommentTimeDec 29th 2012
    Out of curiosity: The discussion started in August, and when will the migration finish?

    If I remember correctly, Anton said there'd be an update in a couple weeks around the end of November. So I'm guessing we'll hear some news soon if everything is going well.

    Tim, the answer to that is equivalent to the Halting problem. :-)
    • CommentAuthorTim
    • CommentTimeDec 30th 2012
    Asaf, you just reminded me I haven't understood the Halting problem.
    Any news?

    Yes. The agreement with Stack Exchange has been settled (and vetted by lawyers). We're in the process of getting some grant money to make a MathOverflow legal entity, and this is holding up the agreement with Stack Exchange (the agreement is between SE and the MO entity). Everything is taking longer than expected, but things really are moving forward behind the scenes--I promise!

    Thanx for the update!
    I plan to make an iOS/Android app for MO. And StackExchange 2.0 API support is the key.
    Is there a detailed timeline about the migration so I can follow up to make a plan? :)

    Unfortunately, there's no detailed timeline. I've been astonished by how long everything has taken so far, so I'm hesitant to speculate about how much longer it will take, but here's an update about the state of things. We've gotten a grant from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, administered through Dartmouth (home of François Dorais, who has spearheaded the effort to get the grant). The legal company which will do the work to incorporate MO will do its thing as soon as we're finished with the paperwork to allow Dartmouth to pay them (tomorrow?). Once MO is incorporated, I can sign the contract with StackExchange immediately, and I think StackExchange will migrate us to 2.0 very quickly.


    @Anton: First of all, congratulations on the grant, and thank you for putting so much time and effort into this. I was wondering if you know the status of MathJax hacks that will break on MO 2.0? Will they be able to be automatically corrected, for the most part? A list of them was collected in this meta.MO thread but there doesn't seem to be any information about whether they can be resolved.


    Zev, yes they will be fixed automatically when we migrate. Geoff Dalgas was following this thread and found solutions to all the major issues.


    François: Awesome, that's a relief - and of course, congratulations to you!

    • CommentAuthorMariano
    • CommentTimeApr 19th 2013

    I think we all collectively owe you people a few thousand glasses of beer...


    But maybe they shouldn't be supplied all at the same time. Think of all the weight Anton would put on.

    I don't know why, but I'm just glad to receive a few thousand pints of beer!


    Quick update: the incorporation of MO is underway. Unless there are any other surprises, this means we should be migrating within a couple of weeks! Once we've confirmed that there aren't any surprises, we'll post a banner on the main site so that everybody has some advanced notice in the days leading up to the migration.

    • CommentAuthorjonas
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2013

    I know I'm a bit late, but I completely support the migration to the StackExchange 2 network under the conditions detailed above, even knowing the difficulties mentioned above and with some of the problems I have with SE.

    Anton, is the fine print of the migration agreement going to be publicized?
    • CommentAuthorquid
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2013

    Related to Asaf Karagila's question: will there be information on the (to be) created "MO entity"? [This is just courisoty I have not problem, if not.]


    @Asaf: You (and anybody else reading this) are welcome to look at them here. Did you have something more involved in mind when using the word "publicize"?

    @quid: Yes, definitely. The documents were filed last Friday to create a Delaware LLC, so we should get confirmation soon. At that point I can sign the agreement with Stack Exchange, we can migrate to SE 2.0, and we can start working on becoming a 501c3 (which is part of what the money from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation is for). I don't have any of the documents dictating how the new entity operates, so I can't share them yet, but the abbreviated version is that I'm transferring ownership of the MO domains to the new entity, which will be run by a board of managers (which will consist of moderators + Ravi Vakil to start with, and modified as the board sees fit).

    Anton, thanks that was more or less what I had in mind.

    But one question remains open. Is MO going to be incorporated into the SE network, like MSE or other sites? Or is it going to remain somewhat isolated, as people suggested and requested in this thread? Similar questions regarding other "unusual feature requests" from the previous pages of the thread.

    Without looking here is a short list of things I remember:

    1. Association bonus to users from outside MO;
    2. MO appearing in the listed sites of the SE network;
    3. Migration paths will be open only under consent of the MO moderators;
    4. Meta site;
    5. Someone said something about somebody buying beer.

    And finally, there was a clause about a test site, is that the test site from September or so that was tested by a couple of folks, or is there going to be another version?
    • CommentAuthorquid
    • CommentTimeMay 20th 2013

    @Anton Geraschenko: thank you for the information and for all the efforts you, and the others in the team, put into this!


    Is MO going to be incorporated into the SE network, like MSE or other sites? Or is it going to remain somewhat isolated, as people suggested and requested in this thread? will be part of the network, just like the other sites. However, MathOverflow is now a corporation and all the ownership rights to will remain with MathOverflow unless otherwise specified by the contract with SE.

    Association bonus to users from outside MO;

    That's part of being on the SE network. We don't know exactly how this may be a problem, so we settled on looking at this again after sufficient experience.

    MO appearing in the listed sites of the SE network;

    I don't remember this being an issue, but clause 5 prevents the network from placing ads on MO without running the idea through us.

    Migration paths will be open only under consent of the MO moderators;

    That's standard procedure, as far as I understand.

    Meta site;

    There will be a SE style meta site and this meta will be kept for historical reasons.

    Someone said something about somebody buying beer.


    And finally, there was a clause about a test site, is that the test site from September or so that was tested by a couple of folks, or is there going to be another version?

    We expect it to be updated so we can spot transition problems before they happen. Much of that was done then but it's been a while...

    Thank you, Francois!

    Just because I'm not sure it happens enough, I just want to say thank you to Anton, and any others contributing to this effort, for what seems like an incredible amount of work to keep this site up and running, in particular this migration.


    I have a question regarding the rather long terms of service for the Stack Exchange network Will they apply to MathOverflow after the migration, if they do not already? If so, how will they apply, and what will be different from the current arrangement? I am specifically inquiring about the parts concerning copyright (parts 3 and 15 in Will the content be automatically licensed to the Stack Exchange network as described in part 3 of the terms of service? (Does that even make sense for Creative Commons licenses?) Also, would that be a problem if the need arises to separate from Stack Exchange?


    Hi Ricardo,

    yes, those terms of service will apply (but have not applied up to this point). While part 3 there talks specifically about licensing user content to Stack Exchange, it mostly doesn't matter to whom one licenses content under a CC license. The important exception is that content is licensed under a CC-BY license, with particular requirements about attribution. Those requirements outlined in part 3 are indeed slightly more onerous than the 'guidelines' we've offered in the past, but I think in fairly harmless ways.

    We have so far had very few requests to remove copyrighted material (described in part 15 of, and are happy with giving up the rights and responsibilities of dealing with these requests.

    But these are excellent questions, about which we should all talk more!


    It's worth noting that the attribution requirements there all result in URLs pointing directly to Because we retain ownership of that name, in the event of a subsequent departure from Stack Exchange all those links will still be correct.


    Thank you very much for your informative answer, Scott. Like you, I also hope there will be more discussion regarding these issues.

    This must be answered somewhere in the 247 posts on this thread, but I'm too lazy...

    1) Will all the content currently on MO be migrated?

    2) Will links stay the same? I imagine there must be some published papers out there now with citations involving MO URLs.

    (One of my in-progress papers will acknowledge an MO answer I received a couple years ago - I'd like to know if I have to do anything right not to make sure I can still find it after migration!)
    • CommentAuthorquid
    • CommentTimeJun 5th 2013

    @Aleander Woo: this is a not and authorative answer, but I am quite confident it is true:

    for 1, yes, definitely this is planned like this (in any case I believe one should think of this more like a software-upgrade from SE1 to SE2 rather than transferring something, as also now the main site is "at stackexchange" already).

    for 2, the main url will stay as is, And it seems the directory-structure below the main url is analogous for (at least for major things like the question) as is for so this should work automatically. And if not, at least now that you raise the issue it should be taken into account (as this would affect quite a number of things).

    • CommentAuthorPoppy
    • CommentTimeJun 5th 2013
    The "user display" one sees when clicking on a user is quite aesthetically pleasing; there is long list of questions and answers, as well as a nice graph showing a complete history of the user's reputation. Are we to be subjected to the abhorrent monstrosity that is the math.stackexchange user webpages? In general, the current mathoverflow site seems to look "nicer" than some other stackexchange sites.