Timeline for Humans, Go, Computers, Math
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
|
|
| Mar 18, 2016 at 16:32 | comment | added | user9072 | @tox123 I suppose one could express it like this. | |
| Mar 18, 2016 at 16:30 | comment | added | tox123 | you mean re-reopened? | |
| Mar 15, 2016 at 20:09 | history | edited | user9072 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
status update
|
| Mar 15, 2016 at 14:05 | answer | added | Todd TrimbleMod | timeline score: 17 | |
| Mar 15, 2016 at 13:45 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | @GilKalai I'm in the middle of writing an opposite opinion, but there may be a chance of salvaging the question if it were more restricted in scope. I don't think anyone can really honestly, in a scholarly way, render expert opinion on the question of fundamental reasons. | |
| Mar 15, 2016 at 13:42 | history | edited | Stefan KohlMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Updated the information on closure of the question.
|
| Mar 15, 2016 at 13:40 | comment | added | Gil Kalai | Maybe a lot of people can discuss the issue but there are a few people some even MO-participants who can give good research-level scholarly answers based on experience in using computers for mathematics. | |
| Mar 14, 2016 at 15:32 | history | edited | user9072 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
status update
|
| Mar 14, 2016 at 1:03 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | What @ToddTrimble said. I didn't vote to close, but I'm not voting to re-open | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 20:05 | comment | added | user9072 | Indeed, in more recent times we have the problem that there are some users that have moderation privileges but seem unaware of what is or at least once was considered standard etiquette related to the usage of these tools. Such as, as a rule votes to close are accompanied by an explanatory comment (if there is none already, and excepting egregious cases maybe) @Lucia | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 20:02 | comment | added | user9072 | @Lucia the first point of this thread, and in this case my main motivation, is that if discussion should happen it can happen here rather than in the comments on the main post. Second, voting to open and close is not really intended as a majority vote; really it is a misnomer this is even called a "vote." Third, it did happen not rarely that users actually changed their mind, or if not at least found a compromise or understood each others opinion better after such a discussion. There are plenty of once controversial subjects that by now are simply resolved due to such discussion. | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 19:41 | comment | added | Lucia | I'm afraid I think these discussions don't seem to help much -- people end up having strong opinions one way or the other, and I'm not sure anyone changes anyone else's opinion. Why not just let people vote as they see fit? I think too that the question has just attracted a bunch of opinions, and I don't know what real answer is possible. But if enough people want it open, so be it. | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 18:45 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | My two cents: this is waaaaay too discussion-y. I think it would be great for a chat room discussion if people are interested in this, but the answers are just tissues of opinion and speculation and prognostication. (Don't get me wrong; I think it's a very interesting question, and I have opinions of my own. But to me it has all the appearance of idle conversation at a bar, or between bright math majors in a dorm room. Not a good use of MO, but people have other ideas apparently.) | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 17:32 | history | asked | user9072 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |