My question is genuine, and I want to improve my understanding of the website with it.
Recently, I've come across this question, which seems to me clearly (no pun intended) unclear. My reasoning was as follows:
- There is no question.
- He says he "does not understand (...)", which is not what he is supposed to understand, since what he states after that is not the definition.
- The next phrase after that also doesn't make sense.
and proceeded by saying:
Okay, so we can explain the concept of a Cauchy sequence. What then? What is the question we are supposed to answer, after addressing that issue?
Also, I noted that the entire relevant body of the question (by that, I mean the part which was not referential only) was "adressed" by my points above.
There were no arguments in the post with respect to my reasoning. However, this does not necessarily mean that I'm right, and apparently the community did not agree, since the question has only 1 close vote (me, although I am not the downvote).
I see two reasons for the disagreement of the community: either I'm wrong, or people didn't close due to empathy.
If the latter is true, there is nothing I can do but lament.
However, if the former is true, I can learn something from this situation in order to improve my judgement of future posts.
Therefore, I ask: Is the question I linked unclear? Why/why not?