# Community Promotion Ads - 2016 [duplicate]

It's 2016 now, and we've made some changes to the sidebar size. As such, we can now restart the Community Promotion Ads for 2016!

Keep in mind, we have updated some of the guidelines compared to previously - the changes are marked in bold in the Image Requirements section.

### What are Community Promotion Ads?

Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.

### Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?

This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:

• useful tools or resources for the mathematically inclined
• interesting articles or findings for the curious
• cool events or conferences
• anything else your community would genuinely be interested in

The goal is for future visitors to find out about the stuff your community deems important. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are relevant to your own community's interests, both for those already in the community and those yet to join.

### Why do we reset the ads every year?

Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.

The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.

### How does it work?

The answers you post to this question must conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored.

1. All answers should be in the exact form of:

[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]

[1]: http://image-url
[2]: http://clickthrough-url


Please do not add anything else to the body of the post. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.

2. The question must always be tagged with the magic tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.

### Image requirements

• The image that you create must be 300 x 250 pixels, or double that if high DPI.
• Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)
• Must be GIF or PNG
• No animated GIFs
• Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB
• If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.

### Score Threshold

There is a minimum score threshold an answer must meet (currently 6) before it will be shown on the main site.

You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats here.

• Link to the last version. Popular results include detexify, OEIS, arXiv, Geogebra, MITOCW, Proof Wiki, and so on. – user296602 Jan 15 '16 at 7:21
• Can we put a link to math.SE, or the meta.MSE, or even this specific page? Or do we want to avoid strange loops like that? Also, can we put an ad which advertises all those sites which do not advertise themselves? – Asaf Karagila Jan 15 '16 at 9:46
• Follow up on last year's trivia note: this post Id is 22419, compared to last year's 19014; the one before it was 11920. This meta was much more quiet in 2015 than in 2014. – user147263 Jan 15 '16 at 15:48
• @Normal I actually keep track of the meta number changes just to see how meta activity goes each year across the network, haha. – Grace Note Jan 15 '16 at 19:38
• Could you please clarify if an old add can be reposted "as is." This comment on Meta Stack Exchange to me suggests this is the case. – quid Jan 15 '16 at 23:00
• @quid The comment refers to paid ads. When asked "will Community ad submissions need to comply to this new size?" Abby replied yes. – user147263 Jan 15 '16 at 23:21
• @Normal I had read that. I do not find it quite clear (it could mean new submissions need to comply). I'd rather assume HDE's original comment to which the one I quote is a reply had all ads in mind. It may well be as you say, but then I'd find the comment there a bit misleading. – quid Jan 15 '16 at 23:33
• Also relevant is this reply to this comment. – E.P. Jan 17 '16 at 16:30
• DaRT, Groupprops, Vector Field Online Graphing, Math Portal at Wikipedia, Math books in Wikibooks, comes to my mind, and sagemath is missing! (I don't know how this works, posting few suggestions in case someone is inspired to add them!) – Jesse P Francis Jan 21 '16 at 18:29
• Are you still planning to update 40KB size limit to 150KB? I could do it myself, but... – user147263 Feb 13 '16 at 23:34
• Two of the ads, when I hover over them, produce the hover-text Tagline to show on mouseover (copied-and-pasted from the format in the question). A third produces the hovertext enter image description here (which is what the software puts as the default description when you use the button to add an image to answer). Can these be fixed? – ruakh Mar 25 '16 at 4:14
• What about Desmos? I think this is a tool that could be very useful for Math.SE, but I don't know how to create a suitable image for the ad. – shardulc says Reinstate Monica Apr 3 '16 at 5:39
• The 2015 campaign post should be marked as a duplicate of this post. – Samuel Lelièvre Jul 20 '16 at 9:57

• Repost from last year. – quid Jan 15 '16 at 20:26
• dimensions requirements have changed since then... – Grigory M Jan 15 '16 at 20:31
• @GrigoryM yes, but – quid Jan 15 '16 at 20:36
• Brand new Detexify ad image =). Inkscape SVG source – E.P. Jan 16 '16 at 0:30
• @Alenanno Double-size ads are allowed and get automatically shrunk; they display better on retina displays. See the specs on the question. – E.P. Jan 16 '16 at 0:44
• @E.P. Ah right, I forgot! – Alenanno Jan 16 '16 at 0:45
• @Normal Gah! good catch, I'll get on it. – E.P. Jan 16 '16 at 0:58
• @Normal The 300px version gets the file size right. I'll just leave it like this. – E.P. Jan 16 '16 at 1:06
• @E.P. thanks that's great! You do not by any chance feel like making one of OEIS too? :-) – quid Jan 16 '16 at 1:44
• @quid I'll put it on the list, but the list is long and that's on the bottom, I'm afraid ;-). I'd much rather you guys advertised the DLMF, though that is an enormous fight against their terrible graphical identity. – E.P. Jan 16 '16 at 1:50
• @E.P. And then... SE is going to change the file size requirement back to 150KB, meta.stackexchange.com/a/273271 – user147263 Jan 18 '16 at 18:29
• @Normal Good catch. Thanks for pinging me. – E.P. Jan 18 '16 at 18:31
• @quid There you go. – E.P. Jan 18 '16 at 19:03

• Posted separately to the port from last year because I don't want to hijack its high score. You're free to change the sequence if you want, the SVG source can be edited in Inkscape. – E.P. Jan 18 '16 at 19:02
• Thanks for the graphics. I would certainly be fine if you "hijacked" the post. But then it is likely more fair if you get the post. I will leave the other up until that one gets over the threshold. – quid Jan 18 '16 at 19:06
• The old OEIS ad linked to the sequence shown in it. Perhaps a link to oeis.org/A005150 might work here? – Ilmari Karonen Jan 20 '16 at 15:49
• @IlmariKaronen Gah! That was the original intention but it got dropped somewhere along the way. Fixed now. – E.P. Jan 20 '16 at 15:54
• The OEIS already has its logo. It' displayed on each page of oeis.org/wiki/. @E.P. – Max Aug 6 '16 at 8:30
• @Max Indeed it does. And you're welcome to submit a separate ad with it if you feel it's important. In the meantime I'll thank you if you leave my original design alone. – E.P. Aug 6 '16 at 9:05
• No offense intended. I don't know how the system of Community Promotion Ads work, but I don't think that in any (legal) framework anyone from "outside" has the right to "create" (and publish) a logo for a brand / community / institution / entity that has itself declared what its logo does (and thus has to) look like. PS: The 2015 promotion ads page featured the "correct" official OEIS logo. – Max Aug 6 '16 at 10:18
• Addendum: To start with, let me say that I approve & appreciate advertising for OEIS! 2nd PS: Now I understand that these are "ads", not "logos". I'm not an expert on the subject, but I'm just surprised that an entity can be advertised for without any official from them knowing about. – Max Aug 6 '16 at 10:36
• The 2015 ads page has different dimensions so we cannot reuse that file. These are ads and not logos, so I certainly don't see the problem. If OEIS have any issues with this ad, they're obviously welcome to get in touch and I for one will take any objections they have extremely seriously. Similarly, if you have any legal comments beyond vague conjectures, I'll be interested in hearing them. Other than that, as I said, if you want the OEIS ad to feature the official logo (instead of just the name in plain text) you're welcome to propose alternatives. – E.P. Aug 6 '16 at 15:15

• @KevinBrown I reused the advertisement of 2014 and 2015. I can't find a bigger picture and I think that the other logos are much less nice (they are somehow less descriptive). I might take the time to build a new similar one with higher resolution next week. – Surb Jan 17 '16 at 22:34
• @KevinBrown I included it. // Surb: I hope you don't mind. In any case I suppose you know how to undo it. :-) – quid Jan 19 '16 at 0:02
• @quid & Surb: Thanks for the edits! The figure in the middle is a screenshot I made for the original 2012 ad, precisely because I felt that it needed something more descriptive than just a logo. If you want to tweak things further, you might find the .xcf and .ggb files linked from the 2012 ad useful. – Ilmari Karonen Jan 20 '16 at 13:46

• Edited version of this 2014 Physics ad. Inkscape SVG source. – E.P. Jan 16 '16 at 0:23
• There is too much negative space on the top part. You should move the division line to somewhere around half rather than what I estimate is 7/12th the height. – Asaf Karagila Jan 16 '16 at 19:15
• @Asaf I'm not sure where the "should" comes from. The ad looks fine to me, and there will always be a sizable amount of blank space, so I don't see that it's terrible to have that space white instead of gray. I was going for a cleaner aesthetic this time but maybe there are sound design principles why it would be better the way you suggest, in which case I would be interested to know what those are. In any case, the source is suitable and your modification is easy to implement so you're welcome to post a version of your own. – E.P. Jan 16 '16 at 21:30
• The "should" comes from the understanding that everything I say, especially things about design, is an opinion which you may or may not agree with. I have no intentions of posting a second ad, that would be silly and even confusing. An alternative is to push the "arXiv.org" up so the space above it shrinks, but the ratios between the colors remain the same. – Asaf Karagila Jan 16 '16 at 21:57
• @Asaf As I said, if it really bothers you then you're welcome to make your own version, but I'm happy with this ad as is and I won't be implementing any changes. – E.P. Jan 16 '16 at 23:31
• Asaf is right: the proportions are terrible. The version at the 2014 Physics link are much better. – Brian M. Scott Jan 17 '16 at 9:15
• To add another opinion: I quite like the open space above the arXiv, somehow symbolizing free, abundant etc (in contrast to the earlier incarnation that was somewhat bottom heavy with that large gray foundation, looking more static). Though if there were slightly less I think it would still work. What I find not optimal is only the positioning of the text in the the gray as it seems too close to the other text or in any case is not vertically centered. – quid Jan 18 '16 at 23:58

• TeX - LaTeX is an awesome site, but I am not sure what the point of advertising it on Mathematics would be. I can see some point in advertising newish or smallish SE-sites, but neither is true for this one. – quid Jan 15 '16 at 19:37
• @quid I disagree: There has been a lot of interest in Latex on the main site (1,500 questions), and a lot of question on TeX SE are about using Maths (equations, plots, etc). – Alenanno Jan 15 '16 at 19:43
• Your comment does not answer my remark at all. Do you believe there is a relevant number of active users of this site that do not know about TeX - LaTeX? Would you also support an advertisement of SO? Further, it might mainly drive low-quality/off-topic content to TeX - LaTeX such as question about MathJax. – quid Jan 15 '16 at 19:49
• @quid Why are you only thinking of the regulars? There are always new users and casual visitors who might Google about it and notice the ad. – Alenanno Jan 15 '16 at 19:52
• To answer the questions directly I assume that a user new to (one site of) the SE network will notice that there are other sites and then will have a look if there might be something they care about. The main point of advertising SE sites in my mind is to make regular users of one site aware of new sites and maybe to give some exposure to small sites, as I explained above. The case that somebody stumbles over this site then sees the tex.se add then goes there and does something relevant seems a bit marginal to me. Maybe you could eventually answer my questions too. – quid Jan 15 '16 at 20:06
• @quid Sorry, I'm not always on this question. Anyway, the point of ads is to advertise other sites. Smaller sites will benefit more from that, sure, but I don't think there is a rule about what sites you can or cannot advertise. I felt that Math was particularly related to TeX since there are really a lot of Maths-related questions on the site, precisely 14,373 at this moment, so that's why I posted the ad. Besides, merely posting the ad here doesn't guarantee it will be used, it needs to be accepted by the community first. Hope that answers your questions. – Alenanno Jan 15 '16 at 20:11
• You replied to a comment containing two questions with a counter question rather than to answer them. So not being on this question can hardly have been the reason. But well. You still do not really answer them, but I guess the last comment is as good an answer I will get, so I'll leave this now. – quid Jan 15 '16 at 20:19
• @quid What counter question? It seems like you don't want any answer, but want me to say something in particular. And by the way, what I'm doing isn't part of the topic. – Alenanno Jan 15 '16 at 20:24
• I asked two questions in this comment You answer with another question rather than to answer them. I have no further interest in this discussion. – quid Jan 15 '16 at 20:29
• @quid I answered the first one and I felt your second question was sarcastic, considering SO's traffic which is not even comparable to TeX, so there was no point in answering that one. – Alenanno Jan 15 '16 at 20:37
• Where/what is the answer to the first question? – quid Jan 15 '16 at 20:39
• @quid Here. But let me rephrase it: I suppose many regulars know about the site, because they know the network. But many new users don't know about it, for whatever reason, not to mention the many visitors who might happen to view this site and then see the ad. I don't think that's something to underestimate. You can disagree of course, but that's how I feel about this matter. – Alenanno Jan 15 '16 at 20:42
• That was not an answer. But now it is. Thanks. – quid Jan 15 '16 at 20:43
• @quid glad we could clarify. – Alenanno Jan 15 '16 at 20:44
• A pedantic remark, but I think the slogan would be better without a question mark. In fact, I wouldn't use any punctuation at all: Beautiful Equations Typeset Beautifully – Austin Mohr Apr 4 '16 at 19:06

• Inkscape SVG source, working off of this image. – E.P. Jan 18 '16 at 19:44
• Much better than last year's version. – user147263 Jan 18 '16 at 19:46
• @Normal. Thanks :-). I wanted to do something like the cover of Spivak's calculus on manifolds but it was beyond me. I think this does a good job, though. – E.P. Jan 18 '16 at 19:48
• Fermat's Last theorem in the margin? – tatan May 14 '16 at 5:28

• I think this ad would be welcome on Computer Science as well. – Raphael Jun 13 '16 at 8:20
• @Raphael Now, that seems to be a nice idea indeed. Done! Thank you for the heads-up. – e-sushi Jun 13 '16 at 9:51

• Design elements shamelessly stolen from Academia. Inkscape SVG source. – E.P. Jan 18 '16 at 18:29
• Stolen for cs.SE, thanks! – Raphael Jan 28 '16 at 13:42
• @Raphael I didn't realize the CS site had graduated, that's good to know. Feel free to pilfer, though attribution is always nice :). – E.P. Jan 28 '16 at 14:12
• I linked all the copies to the posts I took them from. If you want to be credited by name, I can arrange that of course! (Yup, we are with the big boys now. Once our design is up, I hope we'll soon get our own community ad I can spread over the network.) – Raphael Jan 28 '16 at 14:24
• The link is plenty. And congrats. – E.P. Jan 28 '16 at 14:28
• Thanks, I'm pretty happy about things coming full circle for Computer Science! =] – Raphael Jan 28 '16 at 18:04

• I am a big Overleaf fan but should make it clear that this is a for-profit service with a paid component (though one can use it for free, like I do), since some people objected to that last year. – user98602 Jan 19 '16 at 5:16

• I'm curious to know the reason for the downvotes. I expected this one to be a best fit for academia and on second place this site, but apparently not. – E.P. Jan 18 '16 at 19:49
• I do not want this promoted, as I do not think it something good. – quid Jan 18 '16 at 22:30
• @quid What an insightful argument, thanks! – pintoch Jan 19 '16 at 21:42
• @pintoch I am not sure how to read your comment. Anyway, the point of my comment was simply to record that I downvote this because I have a low opinion of the thing to be promoted. This is in stark contrast with my downvote on the tex.se proposal, where I have a very high opinion of the to be promoted thing but do not believe in the usefulness of promoting it here. Put differently I agree the add is fitting in principle, it is also nicely done, but it is just not something I want to promote at all. To explain why I think so, I do not think this is the place. – quid Jan 19 '16 at 22:51
• @quid After clicking through and reading the opinions of those involved in the boycott, I'd really like to hear your opinion, but I agree that this comment area is not the place, nor probably M.SE main or meta. If you do write about it somewhere, please link it here. – Mario Carneiro Jan 26 '16 at 7:34
• @MarioCarneiro I just lost a long comment, maybe it was not meant to be I reply. Very briefly: the page seems not even updated regularly, a "new" saying "last month" yet it seems it was in April. Also I miss the formulation of a goal. – quid Jan 27 '16 at 17:15
• Also the comparison of journal prices seems done in a biased way; I had not even realized this before. If one compares general top-ish journals there is an obvious choice for the Elsevier journal to consider, Advances. Why is the prize of Advances not mentioned but rather that of some three unnamed journals whose chracteristics are not at all comparable as far as I could tell? Could it be because it is only around 0.40 per page (data from same year if I got it right) and this would not seem all that outrageous against 0.26 of JAMS and even a good prize relative to Acta and more so Invent? – quid Jan 27 '16 at 17:17
• Sure Annals would still be quite a bit cheaper, but they also have still longer papers on average which simplifies things. Yes it is not only the price it says but it is the first point in the boycott and a main argument to "sell" the thing. Finally while this not my main issue see some comments on gowers.wordpress.com/2012/07/02/… especially those of Mel Nathanson. Let me also say that there are various good activities around this but that boycott itself is not thought through, and there are some oddities too around it. @Mar – quid Jan 27 '16 at 17:19
• @quid Thanks for sharing. If you do find similar activities be sure to pop them here and I'll be happy to cook up some graphics for them for this thread. – E.P. Feb 2 '16 at 21:51

• – E.P. Jan 19 '16 at 2:18

• I think it would be good to add a short text explaining what's this and/or why it may be useful (for example, "free online graphing calculator") to explain the reader why they may be interested in clicking on the advert. – Alexander Konovalov Apr 3 '16 at 21:41
• @AlexanderKonovalov Sure, except that I'm not so good at graphics. 'Paint' is probably the epitome of my skills. Please do edit the image as you see fit. – shardulc says Reinstate Monica Apr 4 '16 at 1:47
• It ought to say something like "free online graphing calculator with derivatives, integrals, parametric, polar, and more". – Simply Beautiful Art Dec 23 '16 at 13:19

• – E.P. Jun 7 '16 at 16:37
• There is a typo in the word "Access"... – user856 Nov 28 '16 at 23:57
• @Rahul Good catch, thanks. – E.P. Nov 29 '16 at 0:14
• Now there is an overlap between the I and the period in the big "DOAI.io" text... – user856 Nov 29 '16 at 1:29

• That's a bad start! :) Read the conditions in the question once more: they say that, in particular, the image should not be an animated GIF. Quickly change your image, then, if you don't want your post to get downvoted. Make sure that your image satisfies the other requirements, too. – Alex M. Nov 28 '16 at 16:43
• Sorry the uploaded image is not the required size, and it is an animated GIF. I found this thread just a hour ago, had no time to make an image meets the requirement, also having some work to do. This is a math-aware search engine, if it gets enough votes I will consider to make a required promotion image and replace the current. – Wei Zhong Nov 28 '16 at 16:46
• @AlexM. Hi Alex, see you again. I will try to make a required image when I get time. Sorry. – Wei Zhong Nov 28 '16 at 16:55
• @WeiZhong If you plan to replace this by a different image later, deleting your answer until then - and undeleting it after the edit - might be a reasonable thing to do. (As explained by Alex M., it is possible that if the post stays in current form for too long, it might get downvoted.) – Martin Sleziak Nov 28 '16 at 17:09
• @MartinSleziak Thank you Martin, I just want more potential users to see it, this is why I grab an existing image and paste it here. It is passing 1 am Beijing time, I have to sleep. Promise you to replace it later. If it gets downvoted, it is fine. – Wei Zhong Nov 28 '16 at 17:18
• The year is almost over. If I were you I'd wait for the next year and then produce a post according to the then current specifications. (They may or may not change.) – quid Nov 28 '16 at 18:38
• People won't see the ad on the main site until it gets at least a certain number of votes. I actually meant for you to wait until the meta post for next year's ads, which should be about a month from now. But please follow the rules as some people are a stickler for them. If you notice, the ad I made for Graph (purely because I find it very useful) also got downvoted for no apparent reason. @MartinSleziak: If you know the reason, please tell me, but I seriously can't be bothered too much if people reject useful tools without even trying them. – user21820 Nov 29 '16 at 5:30
• @user21820 In this case it is not only "follow the rules - otherwise you might get downvotes". It is also "follow the rules - otherwise the ad will not be displayed in the sidebar" (even if it has enough upvotes). As far as the downvote of your post is concerned, I do not know. I did not try the link myself - however, you cannot be sure whether the downvoters tried it or not. – Martin Sleziak Nov 29 '16 at 5:49
• @MartinSleziak: Yep, I don't know whether they tried it, but I suspect so, since I see nothing so bad about it (GPL, fast, small, accurate). And my comment was "X if Y" and is still true even if "Y" is false. Heheh... =P – user21820 Nov 29 '16 at 5:55
• @quid When will the next year's thread be posted? – Wei Zhong Nov 29 '16 at 15:20
• Let's hope that those who downvoted the animated GIF will come back to retract their votes. – Alex M. Nov 29 '16 at 15:37
• You can check the timestamps from earlier years community-ads You'll see that initially it was begining of December; then January 1st, and this one mid January. It's not clear what'll happen for 2017, but I think the mid January was rather an outlier as the format was changed. Anyway, it should be december or early janaury – quid Nov 29 '16 at 16:11
• @WeiZhong: Well the instructions didn't say the border must be black. Anyway there's a spelling error in your ad! I'll try to remember to upvote your ad for 2017, so just wait around and see when the meta post comes up. =) – user21820 Nov 29 '16 at 17:33
• @user21820 You are right, so now I am also curious why your work gets downvoted. I agree it would be nice that people left some feedback in comments to help us improve. Anyway, I will correct my typo the next time I post that image. Wish both of us good luck in the upcoming AD post. Thank you for supporting my work. – Wei Zhong Nov 30 '16 at 14:44
• @WeiZhong: You're welcome. Although I haven't had much need to use your work yet, I can readily imagine its immense usefulness compared to Google and Math SE's inbuilt search engine! Thank you and all the best! – user21820 Nov 30 '16 at 16:18

• – E.P. Jan 18 '16 at 20:58
• So... Has more than a single review been written yet? – Najib Idrissi Jan 18 '16 at 21:19
• I'm not sure - I don't run the service. (It does look like there's a single review and not a lot of movement on the reviews front since this time two years ago, though.) You'll have to ask soliton, over on Physics, what the site's status is. – E.P. Jan 18 '16 at 21:36
• @najib-idrissi Sorry for my late reply. There is only a single review and the review section does not attract much attention. The majority of our users are graduate students, who do not show much interest in writing reviews. Any ideas on how to encourage users to write reviews? Could you provide some reviews? – soliton Mar 25 '16 at 13:37
• @NajibIdrissi We need the promotion ads to reach out to more users. – soliton Mar 25 '16 at 13:56

• What's that for? It is not clear to me what is advertized. – quid Feb 21 '16 at 22:41
• i contend that this is an amazing ad, helps out in making problems – John Rawls Nov 27 '16 at 6:57

• – E.P. Jan 16 '16 at 0:23
• I find it ironic that this one has even more whitespace than the one Asaf was complaining about. – Mario Carneiro Jan 26 '16 at 7:39
• Yeah, this one is not a happy ad anywhere. Oh well. – E.P. Jan 26 '16 at 10:24

• This is a demonstration post to indicate how this should look when an ad is posted, now with 80px more width (to despise, as it were)! It also doubles as your twitter ad, but it's up to you if you wish to promote it by voting. – Grace Note Jan 15 '16 at 3:22
• Sorry if I'm missing something, but should the answer display an image? – user296602 Jan 15 '16 at 7:15
• I wonder at which point the Twitter bot will "return to the source". From what I understand, these bots are no longer maintained. – Asaf Karagila Jan 15 '16 at 9:45
• @user yes, the code that is prescibed in OP will display the image. It should display the proposed add as it will be seen. See the last incarnation for examples. meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/19014/… – quid Jan 15 '16 at 18:20
• @quid Right, I know - I just meant that this particular answer is not displaying any image (at least for me). – user296602 Jan 15 '16 at 18:21
• @user it displays an image for me. – quid Jan 15 '16 at 18:23
• @quid Huh, that's strange. I see no image in Firefox 44.0b8, but I do in IE10 and Chrome 47. – user296602 Jan 15 '16 at 18:26
• @user I see it in Firefox, different version though. – quid Jan 15 '16 at 18:29
• @quid Weird. I'll try to figure it out. – user296602 Jan 15 '16 at 18:29
• @quid: Neither am I seeing any image... – user142971 Jan 16 '16 at 14:50
• @T.Bongers do you see the images in other answers? (And welcome back. :-) ) – quid Jan 16 '16 at 16:03
• @quid Every single one except this one (Thanks!) – user296602 Jan 17 '16 at 5:58
• twitter.com/stackmath shows 551 follower and it seems that 99% of tweets are announcements of bounties. I don't see the point of promoting bounties via Twitter and down voted this (same as in previous years). Offering a bounty does not necessarily imply that the question is of an interest to a wider audience. For the twitter account, I'd rather like to see links to high quality questions and answers, and indeed some links to questions on the life of the website from Meta. If this will happen, I am happy to upvote this ad. – Alexander Konovalov Jan 22 '16 at 17:17
• My comment have been heard - thanks! (see twitter.com/stackmath/status/690676802667286528 ). I can not upvote it unless it's edited, though. Maybe remove dot after "grow"? – Alexander Konovalov Jan 23 '16 at 0:43
• @AlexanderKonovalov Quite frankly, it doesn't matter whether you upvote this or not: the Twitter ad has always been double-digit downvoted. It's a local tradition. – user147263 Jan 24 '16 at 19:49