# Why use repressive actions instead of constructive?

I posted two questions yesterday that was closed/put on hold.

The question If $p$ is a prime then $p^2+26$ is not a prime was marked as a duplicate of On the primality of integers of the form $p^2+k$, a question that not gives an answer to my question as far as I can see.

The question For which $n\in\mathbb N$ exist a unique prime $p$ such that $p^2+2n\in \mathbb P$ was put on hold as off topic for the site, but is just an abstraction of concrete tests.

Technocracy is supposed to mean 'ruled by experts', which seems to be the right thing for MSE, but how come that my questions are closed instead of answered or edited?

I suppose that the meta site is the right place to deal with such technocracy problems.

• What do you mean it does not answer it? The answer there says that for $p^2+ k$ to be prime it is necessary that $k$ is $0$ or $1$ mod $3$. Now, $26$ is $2$ mod $3$ and that's it. – quid Mar 5 '17 at 13:28
• @quid: yes I suppose you are right. Then, I think, also math.stackexchange.com/questions/2172856/… is a duplicate? – Lehs Mar 5 '17 at 13:32
• It is perhaps less clear cut but arguably, yes. If you think it is a duplicate now, I invite you to mark it as such. Being the user that asked the question you can do this alone. Vote to close as duplicate, then accept the suggestion by the software. – quid Mar 5 '17 at 15:56
• @quid: huh really? No, I'm not interested in repressive actions at all. I'm just interested in truth. – Lehs Mar 5 '17 at 18:52
• I do not follow. In which sense is marking as a duplicate a repressive action to begin with? It is a means to present and to structure existing content. – quid Mar 5 '17 at 19:02
• @quid: closing questions stop talented people from answer the questions. Even if the questions are "duplicates" the answers might not be. But those answers are prohibited by repressive actions. – Lehs Mar 5 '17 at 19:27
• What's wrong with giving those answers on the duplicate target instead? – quid Mar 5 '17 at 19:32
• @quid, Nothing is wrong with that. If it happens. But when a question is asked, sometimes, there is a race between the constructive actions and the repressive actions. The closing process set a deadline for answering. – Lehs Mar 5 '17 at 19:45
• I cannot help but feel that you have set convictions and are unwilling to reconsider them in earnest, instead you play word-games. That's fine but I have more interesting things to do. That's all. – quid Mar 5 '17 at 19:50
• @quid. I also have more interesting things to do, but I can't help wondering about this technocratic repression from time to time. Thanks for your participation! – Lehs Mar 5 '17 at 19:57
• @Lehs Your concerns are valid, since sometimes dupe closure does inhibit (exposure of) novel answers (esp.when the dupe is so old that the site did not have much expertise in the subject area), Generally I close as a dupe only when I think it is unlikely that anything new will be said. If you can make a convincing argument otherwise then you can probably get the question reopened (I have reversed closures on many occasions - including my own gold-badge closures). – Bill Dubuque Mar 5 '17 at 22:52
• @BillDubuque, I finally understod that the question you closed was depending on an other question, but I don't want to erase text in this question. – Lehs Mar 6 '17 at 2:30
• What Bill said. Closing duplicates is one way of maintaining site hygiene and preventing waste of effort. Opinions differ how close a match we need to call a question a duplicate, but it may be better not to get into that here. Anyway, getting a question closed as a duplicate doesn't say anything about the question being bad. – Jyrki Lahtonen Mar 6 '17 at 6:09
• How come that a question of valid concern becomes so heavily downvoted? Hmm! – Lehs Mar 8 '17 at 17:32

...but how come that my questions are closed instead of answered or edited?

Setting aside the matter of the question closed-as-duplicate, putting on-hold Questions that are not up to Math.SE standards is by design to allow the OP (with assistance) to edit the Question and make it suitable for good Answers.

It often happens that a Question is so clear in the mind of the OP that requests for clarification (or worse, misunderstandings by Readers) seem "to be deliberately provocative" (to borrow a phrase).

But it does seem to me that the OP's second Question (closed as "off-topic") needs improvement. I don't think this is the best place to discuss the specifics, but the notion expressed there of having "a unique solution $p$" begs for some clarification. Putting all the Comments into perspective, what is being defined is a property of (natural number) $n$ but this is only discovered in a somewhat roundabout fashion.

If the OP wishes, I would undertake to edit the Question myself toward that end. However I think a better approach in most cases is for the OP to undertake the editing and improvements that are realized from Comments upon closure of a Question.

• I didn't ever see anything wrong with the question math.stackexchange.com/questions/2172126/… but now I have changed it several times, hoping that it will be more clear. It would have been more easy for me if the close voters would have given constructive critics instead. – Lehs Mar 6 '17 at 4:43
• I suspect you might have had more insight if you had printed $p$ out for the "unique" cases, and this might have affected your phrasing of the Question. In any case you made the changes I was looking for, and I've voted to reopen. – hardmath Mar 6 '17 at 15:09

(this answer is directed at the specific topic of labeling "closing as duplicate" a 'repressive' action)

Marking as duplicate is a constructive action — it creates the connection between the new post and the established post, which, for example, has effects like

• Directing the marked questions' poster (and everyone else who comes across the marked question) to a place where there are already answers to the question
• Ensures new answers on the topic are posted in a place where they can be found by people who come across the other question.
• It should be noted that having your Question closed-as-duplicate does not impose any site-related penalty. Perhaps the OP (@Lehs) feels slighted by this, but it is not an intended slight. Connecting the dots helps with search, so future checks on whether a Question has come up before will succeed more readily. – hardmath Mar 6 '17 at 2:15
• @hardmath: I do understand that closing questions is not supposed to be a penalty. But sometimes it feels frustrating when people hurry up to close instead of communicate and give the question a chance. What was thought of as a contribution became a complicated process reminding of a feud. – Lehs Mar 6 '17 at 4:35