# Three strike rule to using MathJax

I believe one problem with math.stackexchange is the lack of discipline by newer users when it comes to using MathJax. Let me elaborate.

Much too often, one can see a question posted by a user that is completely unreadable. The user simply writes his equations inline and waits for some magical fairy to come and make the question "look nice". In my view, too many resources are being spent on editing formulas in MathJax instead of actually answering the questions.

I know what the counterargument is: there are a lot of new users in math.stackexchange, users that the community wants to accept and help them grow. Many of them will eventually become useful to the site and we do not wish to scare them away by punishing them for not using MathJax. Therefore, I believe the problem would be some sort of three (or $n$) strike rule.

The rule is as follows: the first time a user publishes an "ugly" question, the question is flagged as "not using MathJax" and the user is politely but firmly directed to the MathJax help page. He is also told that in order to ask questions on this site, he is expected to know how to use MathJax. Then, if the user continues to use ugly formatting, he gets warned every time this is done, up to some number of strikes, where he is either banned or just starts to lose reputation.

• -1 because it will more than quadruple the workload of moderators. And I am lazy. :) – Willie Wong Feb 7 '14 at 9:45
• Okay, the previous comment is in jest. I did vote -1 because I don't really think this is the right way to solve the problem. The type of users who would willfully ignore community norms such as the use of MathJax are probably also the type of users who care little about reputation and would not hesitate to use throwaway/unregistered accounts to evade any such "bans". So I don't really see the benefit while it will create a lot more work for community members and moderators alike. – Willie Wong Feb 7 '14 at 9:48
• I don't see it causing any more work, instead of a whole lot of work being spent to pretty up questions, we have some work with flagging... I think the users who don't use MathJax at the moment are encouraged to continue what they are doing because someone will come and clean the mess they made... – 5xum Feb 7 '14 at 9:52
• But choosing to edit the question is completely voluntary. Moderators are expected to act on flags (at least if nobody else does). – Tobias Kildetoft Feb 7 '14 at 10:05
• Okay, that's a good counterpoint, I guess. I now agree my idea may not have been the best, however, I still feel there should be more formatting enforcement so as not to encourage laziness... I'm just at a loss how to achieve this. – 5xum Feb 7 '14 at 10:11
• @5xum: Remember that when you flag a post someone actually looks into it, and acts on it appropriately (in theory at least). In the case of custom flags (and these would be custom flags, as I highly doubt SE would ever implement site-specific pro forma flags) they are only looked at by the site ♦-mods. So it will be up to the 8 of us to look into each of these flags, determine if it was appropriate, check how many prior offenses that user has, and send messages/suspend where appropriate. All this as an alternative to distributing the editing of posts among hundreds of active users. – user642796 Feb 7 '14 at 10:12
• We managed reasonably well in the era of ASCII-only in places like sci.math. I really don't understand the pressure to force freshmen to learn TeX just to post here. Sure, it's nice, but come on. They don't have much use for it in RL before they start writing their own math essays and such. Which happens on their second, third, $n$th year - all depending on local customs. – Jyrki Lahtonen Feb 7 '14 at 13:03

• @DanNeely: I'm not saying that that wouldn't be a more convenient option, but since we don't have an integrated, menu-driven $\LaTeX$ editor, the external tool seemed to be something worth suggesting. – robjohn Mar 6 '14 at 20:04