Sarah2391 said:so the answer would be 18?
2 x 2 = 4
72 / 4 = 18
yes?
As a>b>c>1
Then, c=2; b=3 &
So, a=12.
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?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.
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."
Semantics. Unsolved on this site.It is not an "unsolved problem."
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.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.
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 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.
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.
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.