3
$\begingroup$

Two weeks ago I posted this question: What is a good formalization of this classic math puzzle?

The question was closed within hours (presumably based on a misunderstanding), I made some edits a few hours later to clarify what the actual question is and why it is research relevant. Since then I see a private note saying "This post was edited and submitted for review". It seems to me that this question was never reviewed again. Apart from posting this issue here, there seems nothing else I can do?

As part of my edits to the question, I included the following explanation why this is research relevant:

"My original formulation of this posting was marked "off-topic" and closed, presumably because it was considered too philosophical. However, providing careful logical formalizations is clearly a question at the very heart of mathematics, e.g. the formalization in terms of rationally maximizing payoffs that I am alluding to above is simply a standard sequential game. So I am clearly asking a math question within the scope of this forum. Notice also that I am not interested in this little math olympiad problem itself -- that would not be research relevant -- but in the mathematical framework required for its formalization. For example, the Mathematics Magazine articles on "A Calculus for Know/Don't Know Problems" and "Goldbach, Lemoine, and a Know/Don't Know Problem" referenced by Gerald Edgar in his answer below are very relevant and interesting in that regard. By closing this question you have deprived other researchers and me from posting equally insightful answers. I really hope you will reopen this question"

$\endgroup$
8
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Unlike other bigger sites, MathOverflow does not have a large and active community of reviewers (in the custodial, StackExchangean sense of the word). Your question still lies in the review queue, mathoverflow.net/review/reopen/161624 $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila Mod
    Apr 5 at 10:08
  • $\begingroup$ I will add a SEDE query which list all reviews for a post: data.stackexchange.com/mathoverflow/query/1086014/… (Including the one which is not active. After the review is finished, you'll be able to see the link to the review in the timeline of your post.) $\endgroup$ Apr 5 at 10:15
  • $\begingroup$ I have added the tags (review-system) and (re-open) - both of them seem to be relevant for this post. If your main question is about how edits send a post into the review queue, you might consider adding (editing). If you want to ask mainly about this particular question, you might consider adding (specific-question). $\endgroup$ Apr 5 at 10:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ There were 3 reopen votes to the question cast soon after closure, which meanwhile aged away. There is presently one delete vote on the question. To get fresh attention to the question, you could perhaps edit it. $\endgroup$
    – Stefan Kohl Mod
    Apr 5 at 10:32
  • $\begingroup$ @StefanKohl, re, pardon me for expressing surprise—as a moderator I'd assume you know, but is the official advice really to make a (presumably unnecessary) edit to one's post to draw attention to it? I thought the usual advice was precisely the opposite. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Apr 21 at 15:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LSpice Well -- the alternative would be to suggest putting a bounty on the question. But given that the OP has only 75 points (which is just the absolute minimum needed such that the software allows setting bounties), this would perhaps be not such good advice -- and making a (substantial!) edit may be a better alternative. $\endgroup$
    – Stefan Kohl Mod
    Apr 21 at 17:11
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the comments. I edited the question by adding this: "My original formulation of this question was not good, [...] Therefore, within just a few hours of posting the question, it received 6 downvotes and only 1 upvote, and then was almost immediately closed. I strongly suspect that most of those 6 downvotes did only read the "classic math olympiad problem" and not my actual question. Within less than a day I then edited the question to avoid any misunderstanding for casual readers. Since that edit until now (within 30 days), this question has received 2 downvotes and 3 upvotes, [...]" $\endgroup$ Apr 22 at 16:48
  • $\begingroup$ Is one allowed to delete a question and then repost it again as a new question? I believe that those initial downvotes on the question were due to bad formulation, but it now seems impossible to reopen the question because of those. If I repost the edited version of the question as a new question, then I am confident that it will receive more positive than negative votes. $\endgroup$ Apr 22 at 16:51

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .