Timeline for Solution to my question exceeds my knowledge
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 12, 2020 at 10:07 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Dec 2, 2014 at 20:33 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila Mod | [...] My point of view is that ultimately a question will have at least one good answer that the OP can understand, and others which extend well beyond the tools the OP has made available. Of course, in my ideal scenario all the answers are well written, detailed in the right level, and so on. So it's not quite a realistic case; but I still think there are merits for writing a good answer which is useful to the thousands of other readers (including, perhaps, the future OP) even if it goes over the head of the OP at time of posting. | |
| Dec 2, 2014 at 20:31 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila Mod | Matt, this is why I wrote that I somewhat disagree with that point. Asking how to show that every vector space has a basis might be best answered using Zorn's lemma; but having an answer which explains how to approach that problem via transfinite recursion is not worse, and possibly better. Of course an OP with just rudimentary knowledge of set theory will not be able to comprehend it completely, but does that make the answer less useful to people that do know a bit more set theory? No, it makes it more useful. So the question is "should answers be aimed mainly to the OP or not?" [...] | |
| Dec 2, 2014 at 20:26 | comment | added | Matt Gutting | WRT point (1), I'd say that this site is all about having good/useful answers; and the "accept answer" mechanism provides one measure of what constitutes a good or useful answer. | |
| Nov 19, 2014 at 20:11 | history | edited | Asaf KaragilaMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 329 characters in body
|
| Nov 19, 2014 at 20:02 | history | answered | Asaf KaragilaMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |