Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.
Just leaving a comment (and an upvote) to show that I concur. (I do sometimes flag certain answers for deletion if I feel that they have been made in bad faith, or are equivalent to spamming)
Hi Todd - am a bit too busy for MO at the moment but just dropping by to also offer my appreciation of all your work and moderation, in both senses of the word. "They also serve who only stand and wait."
@Kimball It could be that a lot of these questions go unnoticed if one does not have sufficiently high reputation to see deleted answers and deleted questions
I just wanted to chime in that I disagree fundamentally with your contention that by responding to people spamming this site with LLM content we are somehow advancing mathematics. If the people feeding content into LLMs do not understand what they are posting here, and do not understand the responses given by people here, then how is this advancing anything rather than generating more bullshit?
I think some people don't understand what it means to understand something, and hence they are happy to use GPT-or-similar to generate questions because they think that this somehow represents progress.
I was wondering why David's suggestion wasn't yielding what I was looking for. @MartinSleziak - thank you for the offer, I am a bit too busy to engage properly right now, but I may get in touch with you at a later date.
@DavidRoberts At the risk of derailing: is there a queue where one can see "all new answers"? I tend to rely on checking the front page but this only shows questions with recent activity, and some of this is editing
@TimothyChow I don't know how closely you have been monitoring the deleted answers, but all the cases that I have seen and in some cases flagged involve "bullshitting with high powered language". That is, the answer will locally look impressive because it correctly states something about the Hodge-de Rham spectral sequence or a du Val singularity or something, but on inspection this has little or nothing to do with the question, and is applied incorrectly. The Boris Johnson approach, if you will
