3
$\begingroup$

Due to the nature of the thread, What are some examples of a mathematical result being counterintuitive?, I think the normal protection procedure shouldn't apply. It's a type question where there's no real limit on the number of good answers.

Although protecting it prevents "thanks", and "me too" answers, it also prevents good and interesting answers by new users. This is not theoretical - already in the thread we have a 1-reputation new user posting a useful and interesting answer regarding the Kakeya Needle Problem.

I can imagine a random mathematician or math enthusiast stumbling upon the thread via Google and having an interesting example months or even years in the future, but being unable to post because they are blocked as a new user.

Thoughts?

$\endgroup$
11
$\begingroup$

My rationale for protecting the question in, uhurm, question was that posts that already have a thousand or so views and a fine bunch of answers already tend to generate repeated answers (I saw at least one duplicated answer in the question.) or irrelevant comments, so I was already acting pre-emptively.

The barrier for posting to a protected question isn't too high, since only 10 rep (worth one upvote of an answer to another question or two upvotes on a question) is needed for posting to a protected question.

Though I can be convinced otherwise to undo protection with a sufficiently persuasive argument. Or a mod can do the unprotection.

P.S. 28 answers... two more and it's well on its way to getting automagically converted to community wiki. So, no hope for the thirty-first answerer getting rep for his contribution there.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for posting your rationale J.M. . I understand and generally agree with you for most questions, but I think situations such as this are exceptions. $\endgroup$ – Nick Alger May 6 '12 at 5:07
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @NickAlger: Actually they are not. These are exactly situations where preemptive protection is a good idea. Don't take that personally (it's not even closing the question!) and remember that in order to post on a protected thread a user need only to make one decent post elsewhere on the site. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila May 6 '12 at 6:32
  • $\begingroup$ @Asaf: Does the 100 rep bonus still apply for linking SE accounts? $\endgroup$ – The Chaz 2.0 May 6 '12 at 12:28
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @TheChaz: No, in a previous meta discussion it was remarked that the rep. bonus is unaccounted for when the system checks if a user can post through protection. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila May 6 '12 at 12:32
  • $\begingroup$ @Willie: My iPhone-based search-fu is good but not good enough apparently. It will have to wait until the night. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila May 7 '12 at 8:15
  • $\begingroup$ @AsafKaragila: link? I read all 9(6) threads containing "protected"("protection"), without finding it... $\endgroup$ – The Chaz 2.0 Jun 27 '12 at 20:29
  • $\begingroup$ @TheChaz: meta.math.stackexchange.com/a/3196/622 $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Jun 27 '12 at 20:40
  • $\begingroup$ @AsafKaragila: cheers $\endgroup$ – The Chaz 2.0 Jun 27 '12 at 20:43

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .