It is stated in the blog that you can post answers to your own questions (and that it is actually encouraged). Thus I am considering in part to use math exchange to post answers to some questions I come accross for personal future reference (mostly to quickly remember a concept or an explanation I gave) and also for anyone who might find them relevant.

Can you help me on how this post for example could be fixed:

Which are the stabilizers of a group action on subgroup's cosets?

Initially it was not stated as a Q&A and thus the first comments. Are the additional descriptions in the answer acceptable? If it is not a suitable post, would you know of a platform that allows sharing of such notes/quick answers to questions?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Consider a personal blog? $\endgroup$
    – amWhy
    Jan 22 at 17:11
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ All questions, even those you might want to answer, need to abide by quality standards, and your stated question did not meet those standards. How to ask a good question. And merely stating a question does not make it a good question. $\endgroup$
    – amWhy
    Jan 22 at 17:15
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Hmm thanks @amWhy for the link! So the problem is not providing enough content and having a more general answer? $\endgroup$
    – Sotiris
    Jan 22 at 17:37
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Indeed. A question needs to show some context for the question; why it's important to you, of potential interest to others, etc. The link has some excellent suggestions for ways to add context (pick one or two - no expectation satisfy all suggestions). It's also not a bad idea to welcome alternative solutions. Part of why many answerers read questions, is when they have an interest in answering. $\endgroup$
    – amWhy
    Jan 22 at 17:41
  • $\begingroup$ Related: Can I post a question and an answer just because I think it helps others? $\endgroup$ Jan 22 at 18:00
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the link @ArcticChar (and the links in the link). So it seems to be a slightly controversial topic, as a good/not-obvious more most question & answer will, of course, be acceptable but a more simple or trivial one, than one may find in an introductory book let's say, even if not available on SE, may not be considered admissible for some people... $\endgroup$
    – Sotiris
    Jan 22 at 19:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes @amWhy, it gives a good amount of examples. Content inclusion with including just the basics may impose some tradeoff though! By the way, the blog is a very good idea for such cataloging, but I think it probably would be too much. It would be nice to be able to keep such things, as notes/insights/observations in a small form while at the same time sharing it with a community who may offer up alternate viewpoints and even correct some of your interpretations/understanding. $\endgroup$
    – Sotiris
    Jan 22 at 19:14
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Context can take a lot of forms. In this case, I would think of it a bit like the expository text you find in a textbook before going into a theorem. Why care about stabilizers of cosets under group action at all? Perhaps provide one or more non-trivial worked out examples having to do with the issue. Motivation, in other words. Personally when taking notes for research I do this anyway. You may even be doing it in your planned answer to an extent. Think of it like the background section in a very, very short journal paper. $\endgroup$
    – Alexander Gruber Mod
    Jan 23 at 3:22


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .