Timeline for What is the correct answer to this answered combinatorics problem?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
27 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:21 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Nov 16, 2013 at 18:51 | review | Close votes | |||
| Nov 16, 2013 at 20:26 | |||||
| Nov 16, 2013 at 18:36 | comment | added | Rasmus | possible duplicate of arrangement in a circle with a condition | |
| Sep 22, 2013 at 12:14 | answer | added | Marc van Leeuwen | timeline score: 4 | |
| Sep 18, 2013 at 14:00 | vote | accept | PleaseHelp | ||
| Sep 18, 2013 at 1:44 | history | edited | Jonas Meyer | CC BY-SA 3.0 | deleted 62 characters in body; edited title |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:58 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | Seems to me that if all the managers are identical, and all the employees are identical, your answer may be right; but if it is possible to tell one manager from another, and one employee from another, the other answer may be right. | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:58 | answer | added | Ross Millikan | timeline score: 8 | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:57 | comment | added | DonAntonio | @GerryMyerson, I can't see any moral, ethical, appliable advantage in editing an old question and bring it to the top over writing a question as the OP did, not to mention that many newbies (as the OP) may have no pale idea about this. | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:55 | comment | added | DonAntonio | I think downvotes, in general, suck, and if I am to judge by many, many people's reactions sometimes to them, I'd say most of this site's users take them personally or almost. In this particular case the downvotes looked, imo, as serial attack on the poster, and more than remarkd that some trasgression was commited it already looked as punishment (as most downvote look to most people, btw). It's not a matter of being "angry" or being a punisher (?), but as amWhy wrote this usually indicates to most people the question sucks. About the immanent thing: I don't agree, but it's your opinion. | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:54 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | A simple edit to the original question would bring it back to the front page. An edit pointing to the disagreement would have accomplished the same purpose as posting this non-question. | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:49 | comment | added | k.stm | @DonAntonio Downvotes aren't such a bad thing, they are no death sentence, or even a sentence to anything. I wasn't angry with Atul, nor, I believe, was anyone else. I just firmly believe that questions should be immanent since content on other questions might change – what if the other guy or girl deleted his or her answer? So therefore this question was a bad question for it didn't contain a real question. Now, it does contain a real question. Therefore I undownvoted. | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:48 | comment | added | DonAntonio | BTW, I suck at combinatorics (among other things) so I won't even try to do this question... | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:46 | comment | added | DonAntonio | BTW, the question's been re-opened and I've upvoted it to "make things more even"... | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:45 | comment | added | DonAntonio | @K.Stm. , perhaps but then the OP's "sin" is a very, very minor one as not everybody seems to think the same. Perhaps it is a good idea, and a good suggestion to the OP, to re-post the whole question, though the link makes that unnecessary imo. | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:43 | comment | added | DonAntonio | Thanks @amWhy . Sometimes I don't see clearly why things have to be so stiff... | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:42 | comment | added | k.stm | @DonAntonio The very least one can do, is to make the question immanent, that is, to restate the problem concisely, just as suggested by amWhy. Also, I'd probably searched or asked a question on meta on how to handle the situation. | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:42 | history | reopened | amWhy Cameron Buie mdp user1337 DonAntonio | ||
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:37 | history | edited | Cameron Buie | CC BY-SA 3.0 | put context into question |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:29 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:43 | |||||
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:10 | comment | added | amWhy | @DonAntonio + 1 I agree completely (you're post beat me to it!) Maybe the fodder for a meta-question about this sort of situation. | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:09 | comment | added | amWhy | No reason to serial downvote. There are times when answers to a question conflict, and voting doesn't indicate any concensus on "which if any is right". So passerby-ers are likely to be confused, if they have the same question. So what to do? repost and risk being slammed with "DUPLICATE", or be straight and upfront with a link to the post in question and a point blank question regarding: "so what is correct here." Granted, I'd have rewritten the question itself with the conflicting answers and a link to the post in question, but cut some slack folks. | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:08 | comment | added | DonAntonio | I don't get it: what's the OP supposed to do? To write a comment in his own old question, a comment very probably not many (or very few, in fact) people will see as it is a past question, and remain with the doubt? I think this is valid way to post a valid mathematics question, and unless someone explains to me why this is wrong I'm voting to reopen. | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 13:02 | history | closed | Gerry Myerson mdp Clayton martini Zev Chonoles | Not suitable for this site | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 12:54 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | Not the way we do things here. | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 12:53 | comment | added | k.stm | I don't think this qualifies as an own question. Therefore I downvoted. | |
| Sep 17, 2013 at 12:51 | history | asked | PleaseHelp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |