The complete list may include questions not visible on the front page (perhaps from downvotes, maybe for some other reason). Although it is mildly annoying, I think the current arrangement makes the most sense.

If the intent is to vent/object, consider it noted. If the intent is to raise an issue for consideration, I suggest changing to a more neutral tone, especially the last paragraph. Otherwise readers are likely to " get you wrong ".

Regarding your intended replacement title, I personally find it less acceptable than a title that has the strikeout word followed by the replacement word. If someone else said I was splitting hairs, I would not argue against that.

If the readership were exclusively mathematicians to whom cultural referents in language caused no concern, then I would mean something different by "high standards" than I currently do. I don't consider the original version of the question offensive. I do consider it an undesirable precedent that could lead to further posts involving (indirect) name calling and other behaviour that may cause offense. That this forum is mostly devoid of such comes from continual mindfulness. The strikeout was intended to indicate both the fallibility of members as well as the constant striving to improve.

In particular a bibitem to me carries an air of certification; a half remembered event does not, yet may be effective through suggestion.

@quid, I messed up my response and deleted it. The intent is that a vague but suggestive memory might answer this new type: only a bibitem or equivalent will answer a reference request.

Perhaps a "collective memory" tag could be established to indicate the kind of search that can't be done by keyword alone, and for which a brief pointer to the literature would suffice. My second question mathoverflow.net/questions/134826/… would likely have benefitted from such a tag .

What is (the legal representation of) StackExchange's position on archiving content?

Sometimes the front view lists questions not in chronological order of recent activity, perhaps because the order is cached. It does reflect time stamps, e.g. sometimes 1m then 23s then 5m appears for the top 3 questions.

Perhaps you can search on MO for "modeling", and prune the resulting list for questions to migrate.

If they are still available at Cal, you might get George Bergman's 245 notes. If any one alive can do counterexamples in UA, he could likely do them better.

I am mildly amused at the request of existential examples to aid in studying a subject ostensibly laden with universal statements. I suppose MO could stand another big list question.

@Andy, how would a question of the following form be received? "I have applied the following methods X,Y and Z in working on problem Q. A seemingly novel aspect is the (100 word description here). Is this aspect, or even the combination of X,Y and Z, addressed or discussed in the literature? For those wanting more detail, I have (linked PDF) available."

It used to imply that, Tom. Not as much now.

Indeed, as it is with graphic display. Also as with graphic display, such search artists can share their output with the rest of us.

People can filter by tags and searches currently. There was also a suggestion on tea.mathoverflow that amounted to some of the community sorting the questions into two or three broad categories, something like "research" , "reference request", and "other". I imagine there are enough people of high rep who are willing to do this categorizing.