Skip to main content
6 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Dec 31, 2017 at 3:19 comment added Dan Brumleve As another amateur I understand everything you're saying and I wish MO was more like that too. But I don't have very high expectations of getting the same point across since the key word is professional, it's sort of like complaining about prices at the supermarket or that you have to wait in line at checkout, those are just the rules, can't argue with people who are getting paid to do a job. Good points about the value of the innovative spirit and treating newcomers with the golden rule in mind.
Dec 28, 2017 at 12:56 comment added Yemon Choi Sometimes users vote to close a question as "not research level" whereas what is really meant, I think, is something like the following: in mathematics, especially in number theory, it is very easy to come up with a myriad of questions whose statements are elementary, whose truth or falsehood seems very hard to determine, BUT whose solutions do not seem to offer us any insight into the wider contexts/structures that research mathematicians are really interested in
Dec 28, 2017 at 12:54 comment added Yemon Choi Most of this answer seems to be a promotion of your own beliefs that (a) we should encourage amateur mathematicians to use MO to further their own efforts at research (b) amateurs can solve some questions even though professionals say they are out of reach of current techniques. I think both of these points are debatable; but more importantly, they aren't really what the original question was about, in opinion
Dec 27, 2017 at 0:40 comment added Joseph Van Name You would get a more well-rounded view of what MO is about by answering questions instead of simply asking them. On MO, we reward asking questions a little bit, but we reward answering questions much more.
Dec 26, 2017 at 23:02 history edited user114642 CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 8 characters in body
Dec 26, 2017 at 22:56 history answered user114642 CC BY-SA 3.0