Timeline for Editing signed posts
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 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/
|
|
Feb 25, 2017 at 14:41 | comment | added | LSpice | @MattF., my question wasn't what the policy is (indeed, I speculated that it was as you say), but rather whether it was worth an edit just to fix a 'violation'. | |
Feb 23, 2017 at 9:51 | comment | added | user44143 | The stated policy is: Do not use signatures, taglines, or greetings. mathoverflow.net/help/behavior. | |
Feb 23, 2017 at 9:50 | comment | added | user44143 | @GerhardPaseman, I would enjoy MO more if you stopped signing your posts and comments. | |
Jan 21, 2017 at 22:56 | vote | accept | LSpice | ||
Jan 21, 2017 at 22:45 | answer | added | Todd TrimbleMod | timeline score: 6 | |
Jan 19, 2017 at 17:50 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | L Spice, at some point I can do this, yes. | |
Jan 19, 2017 at 17:29 | comment | added | LSpice |
@ToddTrimble, thanks for the update and clarification! I certainly agree that there is no problem with A. Leverkuhn's contribution. (I can't help wondering if it is relevant that the (also very useful and professional) response by Ines Institoris not only is signed, but includes a clearly errant \end{document} ….) Would you be willing to post your comment or some variant as an answer, so that I can accept it?
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 at 17:27 | comment | added | LSpice | @MartinSleziak, yep, that's the one; thanks! | |
Jan 19, 2017 at 16:23 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | Discourage perhaps, but not prevent. In many cases I include my initials along with a substantial edit that I make. Gerhard "Blame Where Blame Is Due" Paseman, 2017.01.19. | |
Jan 19, 2017 at 10:01 | comment | added | Stefan Kohl Mod | I think a main point here is that a signature below a post discourages any editing of that post, as an edit would change what the signing person literally has said. | |
Jan 19, 2017 at 2:01 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | Gerry has referred to a meta post of mine from a little less than 2 years ago, and rereading it now, I am in overall agreement with what I wrote then. Regarding fluff -- although I didn't quite say this then, I think my own benchmark in editing such "fluff" is where it detracts from the general professional standards that we wish to maintain. The MO post of A. Leverkühn seems very professional overall, and the sign-off here doesn't detract in my opinion. So I agree that the edit would indeed be trivial in this instance and probably not worth implementing. | |
Jan 19, 2017 at 1:45 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | @LSpice You probably mean this post (made by Gerry Myerson): Disappearing “Hi!”. | |
Jan 19, 2017 at 1:17 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | Sorry, I didn't mean that you'd find an unambiguous, authoritative answer at that link, only that you might be interested in a previous discussion which touched on your question (and maybe this earlier discussion was the source of your impression about MO policy). | |
Jan 18, 2017 at 22:36 | comment | added | LSpice | @GerryMyerson, thanks, but it seems that the post says "delete fluff", while the comments, including from the post author, say "fluff is OK". Does this just mean that it is up to the potential editor's discretion? | |
Jan 18, 2017 at 22:35 | comment | added | LSpice | @AndrásBátkai, automated editing has its own problems; I remember (though I can't find) a post about the difficulties of referring to the work of a mathematician named 'Hi'. | |
Jan 18, 2017 at 21:35 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | See meta.mathoverflow.net/questions/2208/editing-etiquette/… | |
Jan 18, 2017 at 21:15 | comment | added | András Bátkai | I remember in the earlier version of the SE software such politenesses were automatically deleted by the SE software. They were not wanted. | |
Jan 18, 2017 at 21:07 | history | asked | LSpice | CC BY-SA 3.0 |