Timeline for What do you really like about working with/contributing to math-SE?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:22 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 7:14 | comment | added | Hendrik Vogt | @Amy: Your last comment sums it up very well, it's really the tone that makes the difference. (And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one appreciating your comments here.) | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 7:13 | comment | added | Hendrik Vogt | @Qiaochu, concerning "exemption for high rep users": I'm not sure if this is true for math.sx, but on tex.sx I've seen bad questions, bad answers and wrong comments (with lots of upvotes!) by high rep users, which are usually not followed by curt and scolding comments. This can indeed leave the impression that double standard are applied. | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 2:43 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan Mod | @Amy: point taken. I would be happy to see a meta thread on this subject; I think this is well worth bringing to the attention of more users. | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 2:26 | comment | added | amWhy | @Qiaochu: I'm not contesting the expectations held; yes, ideally, we would hope that learners have done a preliminary search, have made an effort, are not expecting to have homework done "for" them, etc. It is reasonable to make such suggestions in the form of comments to the OP. It's the tone in which the comments are often made: short, curt, scolding, etc. I have a PhD in CogSci (mathematics & Cog), a PhD in Philosophy, but returned to math to earn my MS, now working to PhD. So I bring with me an acute sensitivity to the factors that best promote (or inhibit) mathematics learning. | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 2:18 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan Mod | (cont.) and as I have said, this is behavior we strongly discourage. I'm also not sure of what to make about your comments about "downvotes": I hope you don't think we're so vindictive that we would respond in this way to reasonable criticism! Quite the contrary, I appreciate you saying all this: as someone who has been here for awhile it is hard for me to see what all this looks like "from the outside." | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 2:15 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan Mod | (cont.) I'm not sure what to make of your comments about reputation. High reputation correlates with having been around for awhile and, as the FAQ indicates, is a rough measure of how much the community trusts and/or values a user. It is also a rough measure of their investment into the community, and consequently I think it's perfectly reasonable to give them the benefit of the doubt about the sources of their questions. The average new user, however, is an unknown: the average new user asking a question in the imperative is fairly like to have copied that question word-for-word from homework | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 2:13 | comment | added | amWhy | @Qiaochu: Thanks; yes, I realize it would help if I could be more specific; I will make a point of contacting you by email. I apologize if I "cluttered up" this page with excessive comments. And given what I've said here, today, I'll expect to see some "downvotes". Thanks for extending the invitation to contact you directly. | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 2:12 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan Mod | (cont.) person, in almost any situation, does first when trying to answer a question. Certainly we don't expect a new user to be aware of all of these things; that's what comments are for. I agree that they are often phrased in a hostile manner, and this is something we should work on as a community. | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 2:09 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan Mod | @Amy: I agree that these expectations look hostile, but some of them are geared towards preventing users from getting free answers to their homework questions, and I personally believe this to be sufficient justification for a little hostility. Accepting answers has less to do with reputation and more to do with showing respect for the answerer, who after all is a total stranger and has no obligation to help you. Searching Wikipedia, Mathworld, and the list of existing math.SE questions takes very little time; all three are indexed on Google, and Googling should already be the first thing any | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 2:00 | comment | added | amWhy | cont....who have searched Wikipedia, MathWorld, and searched the math.SE questions already answered, who...and...and...From all the gripes I see, there are so many expectations held for questioners, most of which an OP can learn only after making the mistake of not doing the above, and hence, "scolded"...literally...Yes, I realize this is not going to be welcome, as a comment. I'll cease here, perhaps post a question/topic for discussion after taking a breather from this site, if I decide to return, for the sake of questioners. (Unlike most here, I could give a "darn" about rep. | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 1:56 | comment | added | amWhy | cont. This site is welcome to those with high reps (who automatically are exempted from scrutinizing questions about "source of question"..Though "high brow" questions can also easily be seeded), to those who "know enough" to LaTeX their question, who don't ask questions in the imperative, who (if they have low rep, since high rep users aren't asked what they've already tried) map out the question, their attempts at solutions, who correctly tag their questions, who bow down and ensure to accept an answer lest the answerer be deprived of "rep"...who have read the FAQ etc... | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 1:49 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan Mod | @Amy: I would like to help address these issues you are bringing up, but I am still not sure what you mean. Which users and perspectives are you referring to? If you are hesitant to be more specific about your concerns in public, feel free to email me at [email protected]. | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 1:41 | comment | added | amWhy | (cont.) I will collect some questions of varying levels of "sophistication" along with the answers and comments that follow, to help point out specifically the ways in which "low brow" vs. "high brow" user-questioners are spoken to, addressed, etc in very different ways, apart from the level at which a question is answered. The same difference can be seen when comparing questions from high-rep vs. low-rep users. I do need to take a break from this site, though, because I find the elitism here, and the attitudes towards so many users to be terribly disturbing. | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 1:40 | comment | added | amWhy | (cont)...Regarding the asymmetry I'm noticing, I meant more so among users/answerers. As for the intolerance of and hostility towards minority perspectives, I'm referring to the "community" of users engaged on meta and in answering questions on math.SE. The resignations, migration of key users, who happened to hold perspectives similar to mine, and still-current users who run against the grain are effectively being winnowed out, perhaps by design... | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 1:39 | comment | added | amWhy | @Qiaochu: You're right; what you mean by "signal to noise" ratio is not what I took it to mean. There's an awful lot of jargon used here; I'm doing my best to pick it up. | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 0:40 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan Mod | ...preserving a useful resource. I am not sure what you mean by intolerance of and hostility towards a minority perspective; could you be more precise? | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 0:39 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan Mod | (cont.) I also fail to see what any of the things you pointed out have to do with levels of mathematical engagement. I have seen no evidence that we discriminate against people based on mathematical level, if that's what you mean. What we discriminate against is a lack of effort on the part of the questioner, which is correlated to, but conceptually distinct from, mathematical level. Our goal is not to degenerate into a place filled with homework questions and spam, and while this requires aggressive moderation and other policies on our part, I think it is justifiable for the sake of... | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 0:34 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan Mod | @Amy: I'm not sure we mean the same thing by "signal-to-noise ratio." I mean two things by this: 1) that the average question is more interesting than the average question on other math forums. This comes about as a result of moderation. 2) that the average answer is more helpful than the average answer on other math forums. This is partly because we absorbed a decent population of users from MathOverflow in the early days, as well as moderation and the voting system. I don't see what any of the things you pointed out have to do with signal vs. noise on the main site, as opposed to meta. | |
| Apr 28, 2011 at 0:30 | comment | added | amWhy | @Qiaochu: I'm not so sure about how great the "signal to noise" ratio is here. I haven't yet encountered a Q&A community with as much asymmetry, or what strikes me as intolerance of (and hostility toward) what seems to be the perspectives of a minority of folks here, growing smaller with each resignation, migration, of key folks. Just growing concerned, that's all. Certainly, I can migrate elsewhere (clearly, I'd hardly be missed). From what I've seen on Math.SE, confirmed here, I believe this site is failing miserably to extend an "open invitation to all levels of mathematical engagement" | |
| Apr 25, 2011 at 16:35 | comment | added | amWhy | @Qiaochu: Great answer. Aahhh...I too am deeply interested in math education: and in answer to my own question, that is a great motivator for me, as well as my love for math. I wouldn't have even "crossed the threshold" of this site's "doors" if I wasn't inspired by the breadth and depth of questions, coupled with the open invitation to people at all levels of mathematical engagement. | |
| Apr 25, 2011 at 16:22 | history | edited | Qiaochu YuanMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 388 characters in body; added 43 characters in body |
| Apr 25, 2011 at 16:13 | history | answered | Qiaochu YuanMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |