Not signed in (Sign In)

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


    I'm referring to this question, <a href=""></a>, which was closed as "blatantly offensive".

    I saw no edits, and the worst thing about this particular question was OP's peculiar insistence there had to be a closed form, and maybe a mild tone of impatience about the time OP was waiting for an answer over at MSE. But how is it blatantly offensive?

    (Another question from OP seemed more obnoxious, as various versions of the question seem to be "baiting" mathematicians. (Incidentally, I didn't see an easy solution to that other question, having to do with $\int_0^1 x^{x^x} dx$, although it's easy enough to get confirmation from Mathematica that that's greater than $\log \sqrt{\pi}$.)

    • CommentAuthorRyan Budney
    • CommentTimeMar 26th 2013 edited

    This isn't a perfectly apt usage of the "blatantly offensive" flag but I can see why people chose that rather than "off topic" or "too localized" in this instance. The OP was giving off a fairly imperious vibe with the "I hope it won't take another 4 hours in vain" comment.

    There's been a more than the usual amount of spam the past few days. It looks to me like the people that choose to help with moderation are getting a little tired.

    • CommentAuthorgrp
    • CommentTimeMar 26th 2013
    I don't know that the question is blatantly offensive, but the
    tenor of the comments following does not mollify; the choice of
    reason for closing is a bit exaggerated, but using it to say
    something about the appearance of attitude meets with my
    approval. Then again, I'm in a mildly cranky mood today.

    Re the question, did anyone consider setting t = 2/3 and
    looking at the kth summand as sum j=k to inf t^jk ?

    Gerhard "Perhaps Tomorrow Will Be Different" Paseman, 2013.03.26

    Yeah, there is a lot of spammy stuff these days. Speaking generally, the quality of questions on average seems to be going downhill as MO gets older.

    The thing that most worries me about this question is the potential for "earworm infestation", due to an association with Peter Frampton. (If this comment makes no sense to you, forget it. It's completely silly and unimportant.)

    As a sidebar, I agree (for the Nth time) with Todd's sentiment that "the quality of questions on average seems to be going downhill as MO gets older" and want to (for the (N-1)th time) repeat that material from the level of second year of grad school up should be on MO as a rule of thumb. There are questions on MSE that belong on MO and vice versa.

    I re-closed as no longer relevant.


    Thank you, Francois (or François).