(a)(b)(c) =72, w/ a > b > c > 1: greatest poss. value of a
- Thread starter Sarah2391
- Start date
D
Deleted member 4993
Guest
Re: (a)(b)(c) =72
No..
b>c ... then both cannot be 2
Sarah2391 said:
No..
b>c ... then both cannot be 2
Nafis Saleh
New member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2022
- Messages
- 1
As a>b>c>1
Then, c=2; b=3 &
So, a=12.
Then, c=2; b=3 &
So, a=12.
You replied to a post that is about 14.5 years old. For any of your next posts (of other
threads) that you reply to, please let them be more current. Also, allow students time
to get their attempts in the thread before you post the solution. This would mean
after four days after the last post of the original poster for just the answer or seven
days after the last post of the OP for the answer and its steps.
Last edited:
ausmathgenius420
New member
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2021
- Messages
- 44
How does someone finally posting a solution to an unsolved problem negatively affect you or the site in anyway? Textbooks recycle questions for decades some times, why not provide the solution for it here, especially after it was asked?
Thanks @Nafis Saleh for your contribution
How does someone finally posting a solution to an unsolved problem negatively affect you or the site in anyway? Textbooks recycle questions for decades some times, why not provide the solution for it here, especially after it was asked?
Thanks @Nafis Saleh for your contribution
It is not an "unsolved problem." It has been solved before. An "unsolved
problem" is one that has never been solved before.
It is not a valid argument to ask if something is to "negatively affect" me, as I
am pointing out about keeping threads relatively current. You are attacking
the messenger.
There is no point in providing a solution, because the thread is essentially
dead. No one is looking for an answer at this point. We don't provide solutions
just because they were asked for, anyway. You had some history in a different
thread in this site where you were explained to how complete solutions are not
given out just because they were asked for.
No, you should not thank user Nafis Saleh for the contribution, because it is
enabling by you.
As a new user, you are already being argumentative to more than a couple of
veteran users in more than one way. You should read (or reread)
"Read Before Posting!!" guidelines somewhere at the top, particularly the
subsection "Be Nice."
Last edited:
ausmathgenius420
New member
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2021
- Messages
- 44
Semantics. Unsolved on this site.
My reply was hardly personal. I was genuinely curious, because it seems from personal experience, that “veterans” get quite offended when newbies try offer help in a different (perhaps incorrect) way.
Your post began by telling Nafis to not reply to old threads. Then not to reply to very new threads. Then to wait 7 days before posting an answer (satisfied)… btw other seniros ave suggested waiting a month - so where is the consistency?
My point about textbooks recycling questions was very clear. Just because OP doesn’t need the answer, doesn’t mean someone who’s reading that same textbook (or newer edition) won’t benefit from it.
Using this site for one year, I wouldn’t consider myself a new user. In fact, I don’t think any members time on the site should affect the validity of their criticisms, feedback, or arguments.
I believe the members who shoot down new members contributions (who are trying to help the community), should perhaps read the section themselves.
It is really disappointing to see the passive aggressive and toxic environments this community exhibits in some threads.
topsquark
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2012
- Messages
- 2,269
The whole issue is about members that may be trying to cheat. Some members (hopefully not many) come here just to get the answer, which they can just copy and get credit for. We've even had members in the middle of taking an online test. We try to limit this and stop those who are trying. Other Forums have similar policies and some have policies that make even me itch with how stringent they are.
I agree with you that it's a bit silly to argue about when the thread is more than a decade old, but the principle still stands. Personally, I'm fine with Nafis Saleh posting the solution. But generally we leave the old threads alone as the OP is nowhere to be seen any more. If someone comes along and wants to see a solution we will work from there. As Nafis Saleh did not know this (this being his/her first post) it was appropriate for lookagain to let him/her know what the rules are here. There was nothing confrontational about his post.
-Dan
Cubist
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2019
- Messages
- 1,666
I've been helping on this site for a couple of years now and I wasn't aware of the goal about not providing an answer for a very old post
IMO I don't mind threads being completed/ answered. Perhaps @Nafis Saleh wanted their answer to be checked by others, and by posting in this thread they have shown an amount of due diligence (they have tried some research). Also they haven't had to re-type the question (which they would have had to do by starting a new thread).
If this site doesn't want to become a reference site over time (a place where answers to old questions can be looked up) - then perhaps it would make sense to expire/ delete every old thread beyond, say, a couple of months? (I think you'd have to make it well known that this is the forum policy, since some helpers might want to have their contributions immortalized <emoji of the statue of an ancient scholar! > )
--
Note1 I'm not being argumentative either - I do want to follow the consensus.
Note2 I just made a suggestion in another thread (click) that might help
IMO I don't mind threads being completed/ answered. Perhaps @Nafis Saleh wanted their answer to be checked by others, and by posting in this thread they have shown an amount of due diligence (they have tried some research). Also they haven't had to re-type the question (which they would have had to do by starting a new thread).
If this site doesn't want to become a reference site over time (a place where answers to old questions can be looked up) - then perhaps it would make sense to expire/ delete every old thread beyond, say, a couple of months? (I think you'd have to make it well known that this is the forum policy, since some helpers might want to have their contributions immortalized <emoji of the statue of an ancient scholar! >
)--
Note1 I'm not being argumentative either - I do want to follow the consensus.
Note2 I just made a suggestion in another thread (click) that might help
I have been a member here for a long time; I used to post under a different name so the ten years shown under my current name does not reflect my actual history.
I do not recollect any discussion about old threads so I doubt anyone has violated any rule. I do believe, however, that we should discourage posting answers, with or without steps, to dead threads, primarily for one reason.
Our philosophy is, ignoring exceptions, to engage with students in a Socratic dialogue to help them find the logic of a problem or to identify their own errors. It is true that teachers recycle problems and courses use the same text book year after year so a student searching for help may well find our site with respect to a dead thread. If we have provided an answer to such a thread, we fail to provide that student with what we believe to be the most effective help.
I trust that that responds to the legitimate curiosity of ausmathgenius in an informative and respectful way.
I did not find the original post of lookagain to be confrontational or rude, but much of it does not pertain to the issue of waiting seven days to give an answer. If we are going to give answers after a delay, fourteen years seems more than adequate.
I do not recollect any discussion about old threads so I doubt anyone has violated any rule. I do believe, however, that we should discourage posting answers, with or without steps, to dead threads, primarily for one reason.
Our philosophy is, ignoring exceptions, to engage with students in a Socratic dialogue to help them find the logic of a problem or to identify their own errors. It is true that teachers recycle problems and courses use the same text book year after year so a student searching for help may well find our site with respect to a dead thread. If we have provided an answer to such a thread, we fail to provide that student with what we believe to be the most effective help.
I trust that that responds to the legitimate curiosity of ausmathgenius in an informative and respectful way.
I did not find the original post of lookagain to be confrontational or rude, but much of it does not pertain to the issue of waiting seven days to give an answer. If we are going to give answers after a delay, fourteen years seems more than adequate.
D
Deleted member 4993
Guest
I personally like for student/user to discover the answer - time lapsed does not matter. So (again personally) providing full answer simply cheats the student out of the excitement of discovering the answer.
I remember, long long time ago, in my sophomore year of college, the professor made us derive the expression for Taylor series expression in the class room. Each student took his/her turn (we had one "her") in the class - and derived one term and wrote it on the board. I can still derive the general "Taylor Swift" expansion. I just cannot erase that from my involuntary memory......
Anyway, personally I would prefer "not to provide" complete "xeroxable" answer unless I am satisfied that this "late enquirer" has made a honest attempt towards solving the problem.
Just my opinion..... not a forum guideline ....... not a dictum.......
Incorrect. You used the wrong terminology, and I corrected you. Words have
meaning, so please just choose your words more carefully next time.
You used an invalid argument by making it about me. That was the point there.
No, I did not. I stated for the threads to "be more current."
Then you are wrong for not considering yourself a "new user." It is not how long you
have been here, but how much content/number of posts you contributed. At a recent
count, you had only contributed 32 posts as a "New member."
Then you believe incorrectly. Veteran members help steer new members, such as you
being one, toward threads that are more timely, instead of resurrecting defunct ones.
No, it is disappointing to see a user such as yourself, who has been on this site about a year, and claims to not consider himself a "new member," argue with veteran members about solution-posting policy.
Consider how recently you were helped by certain members who gave you prompts,
questions, and partial steps gradually in different posts toward the solutions of your
questions. The way they did it for you is a model for what they expect from you to
other users presenting questions.
Steven G
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2014
- Messages
- 14,383
As long as new helpers do not post full answers we have no problem with them. OK, if they post the wrong solution (which I have done way too many times) then they may be attacked and ask to be sure that they are correct next time.
We get a few new helpers each year and all the other helpers get a long fine with them. OK, after we make it clear to them not to post complete solutions we get along fine with one another.
Do you see a theme here? We don't believe at all that giving students the solution to their problems is helping them.
Whether someone likes it or not, it is written in this forum's guidelines that giving complete answers is not allowed (within a certain time period) and could get a user banned from the forum if they choose not to adhere to the guidelines.
We get a few new helpers each year and all the other helpers get a long fine with them. OK, after we make it clear to them not to post complete solutions we get along fine with one another.
Do you see a theme here? We don't believe at all that giving students the solution to their problems is helping them.
Whether someone likes it or not, it is written in this forum's guidelines that giving complete answers is not allowed (within a certain time period) and could get a user banned from the forum if they choose not to adhere to the guidelines.