Timeline for Is it time to retire the 0.999=1 question (and other historical questions)
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
28 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:22 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Dec 30, 2016 at 10:41 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackMath/status/814783402184413184 | ||
| Dec 27, 2016 at 11:27 | comment | added | Watson | The question here has been locked. | |
| Dec 20, 2016 at 8:19 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila Mod | @celtschk: Sure, and I do. But when you have a question with more deleted answers than undeleted answers... Maybe it's time to take a drastic measure to this question? | |
| Dec 20, 2016 at 8:18 | comment | added | celtschk | If you think a new answer removes value, wouldn't the appropriate reaction be to downvote that answer? | |
| Dec 19, 2016 at 1:57 | comment | added | Simply Beautiful Art | huh, I saw someone trying to post an answer there the other day, and I also noticed how many deleted answers there were. I mean, c'mon... | |
| Dec 17, 2016 at 22:05 | answer | added | Count Iblis | timeline score: -4 | |
| Dec 16, 2016 at 23:57 | comment | added | copper.hat | Perhaps you could view the answers as an outlet of sorts; so blocking that sewer line might mean that the contents show up is a less desirable place? | |
| Dec 16, 2016 at 3:29 | answer | added | user642796Mod | timeline score: 19 | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 21:56 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila Mod | Let me address the last few comments together: This is not about FAQ, nor about questions which get asked repeatedly or get a lot of new answers. This is about questions which already have plenty of answers which pretty much cover every "reasonable" answer and more, as well a whole lot of noise (either deleted noise or just many duplicated answers). Even worse, questions of these nature which keep getting bumped on a semi-regular basis, with mainly increase of noise (as compared to fresh answers). This is about locking these questions and maybe also the answers. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 21:35 | comment | added | Bill Dubuque | For those who were not around on older math forums, it is worth mentioning that this particular question was almost surely the most frequently asked question on sci.math. So it is not at all surprising to see it similarly getting heavy attention here. It is a very extreme example of a FAQ, so perhaps not the best example to use to devise policies for a more typical FAQ. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 20:31 | comment | added | Najib Idrissi | @amWhy I assume it means that the question will be locked, and future users will be "banned" from asking it again in the sense that their new question will be a duplicate of the old one and closed as such (with a link to the old one as usual). | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 15:48 | comment | added | The Count | @AsafKaragila, I was only tangentially talking about the question, honestly. Just making a comment from personal experience. Carry on, carry on. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 15:45 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila Mod | @TheCount: Sure, but in the last year most of the answers that were added were also deleted. And probably those that weren't deleted, are just repeating arguments from older answers. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 15:43 | comment | added | The Count | @Asaf, Not at all! I just meant I get annoyed when people argue the fact that $0.999...=1$ specifically, as though it is a topic of debate. I think you misunderstood me. Apologies. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 15:41 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila Mod | @TheCount: You make it sound as though I'm suggesting to close every question with many answers. This is certainly not the case. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 15:00 | comment | added | The Count | I, for one, like the thread and welcome its expansion. I have 6 different proofs that range purely from thought experiments to rigorour proofs that I like to use. But the arguing is what gets me. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 5:00 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila Mod | @mixedmath: Looking at the mention of this question in the question Martin linked above, it shows that in one year over 17 answers were added, most of which were deleted. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 4:58 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila Mod | Thanks @Martin, I had a feeling I brought this up sometime in the past. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 4:56 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | This post seems somewhat similar: Should we close/lock old questions with many answers at some point?. Even this particular question is mentioned there in comments. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 4:55 | history | edited | Martin Sleziak |
I have added (locked-questions) - we do not have tag called locking or something like that. I was hesitant to add (specific-questions), since it seems that you are asking both about this case and general guidelines for similar questions
|
|
| Dec 14, 2016 at 23:54 | comment | added | quid | Leaving that aside and let's assume for the sake of argument it is appropriate (and I have no strong feelings about it being otherwise): the question is evidently exceptional so what we usually do is not all that counts. We usually also do not protect questions. In this case the "protect" is empirically just not strong enough. Re improvements by edits: the last edit just undid poor grammar introduce in the penultimate one, which did nothing besides that. @mixedmath | |
| Dec 14, 2016 at 23:46 | comment | added | quid | "I think that closing is not a good action as we usually close to indicate questions that are a poor fit for the site, whereas these questions evidently are appropriate for the site." Why is it evident? One might say it "lacks context." Incidentally, the question was closed, in the 'old days,' in 2010, which I am often told were much better and not so hostile. Plus, the question was locked from 2010 to 2014. Given this it might be a good example for a Q that should be historically locked. | |
| Dec 14, 2016 at 23:07 | comment | added | davidlowryduda Mod | @quid Generically, I'm not sure. On this question --- no, I do not expect new answers to add new insights on the problem. But I am also aware of the ideal, where some new answer might come along and provide a different point of view that helps someone else. I think that locking the question is not a good action, as I see no good reason to prevent upvotes or (generically) edits. I think that closing is not a good action as we usually close to indicate questions that are a poor fit for the site, whereas these questions evidently are appropriate for the site. | |
| Dec 14, 2016 at 22:50 | comment | added | quid | @mixedmath do you expect further answers that add something relevant and will get any relevant visibility? | |
| Dec 14, 2016 at 19:04 | comment | added | davidlowryduda Mod | I'm a bit surprised that there aren't more comments here. But I'm not inclined to lock or close the historical giant questions, at least not at their current rate of popping back up. They continue to receive a trickle of upvotes, and there have been good edits more than two years after initially being asked. The $0.999\ldots = 1$ seems to receive about one answer per month, which doesn't seem too bad to me. | |
| Dec 14, 2016 at 7:26 | comment | added | Surb | Another positive side that I can see in locking these questions, is that it protects them from deletion (big problem in here...). | |
| Dec 14, 2016 at 6:55 | history | asked | Asaf KaragilaMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |