Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Meta

Comments on I would like to receive explanations to the edit to my post.

Post

I would like to receive explanations to the edit to my post.

+2
−3

I have recently posted a question.

Here is how I typed a sum there: $\sum_{i=1}^{i=N}$.

Here is how it was edited: $\sum_{i=1}^{N}$.

The comment to the edit reads: "... for correctness".

I cannot understand what is incorrect in my way of writing the sum. However, since I am not a mathematician, I assume I can be wrong.

Thus, I am wondering what exactly is incorrect in my expression.


Clarifications.

  1. The edit was suggested by @Flomic and approved by @Peter Taylor.
  2. I could not find a way to send them a private message asking for explanations.
  3. I edited the post back because I consider my original expression correct. I will edit it if I receive mathematically rigorous intelligible explanations.
  4. The reason I wrote it the way I did was because I like it that way and I think it is a better, clearer and more rigorous way than the suggested edit. With that in mind, if the editors made the edit simply because they like their way better I would like to express my objections. Here they are. Such behavior implies that you put yourselves above me because you think your opinion is more important than mine. Such behavior implies abuse of power, because you used your position to enforce your opinion on me. The later is associated with assault on personal freedom when, instead of giving the reasonably largest freedom of expression to the users, the team reduces the freedom of expression justifying it by a common good of providing to the world, what the team thinks, the best formatted content. If the assumption is correct, I would like you @Flomic and you @Peter Taylor to explain yourselves.
History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

2 comment threads

I wanted to approve the edit but change the edit summary to remove the mention of correctness, but th... (4 comments)
Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital-sigma_notation . The upper bound is usually written ... (3 comments)
Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital-sigma_notation . The upper bound is usually written ...
samcarter‭ wrote 8 months ago

Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital-sigma_notation . The upper bound is usually written without i=

Ivan Nepomnyashchikh‭ wrote 8 months ago · edited 8 months ago

I would argue that "usually" is not a good enough reason to change a man's post in such an impudent manner. I had noticed people did not use i= at the top of the sum sign. That bothered me both aesthetically and from the readability viewpoint. I developed my way of writing the sum sign, i.e. using i=. From my perspective, it only enhances readability and in no way does it make it worth. And then two users decide between themselves how I should have written my post. In the current case, the edit crosses the line of abuse of power because there is no reasonable doubt that my way of writing confuses a reader. The sum sign will stay as I wrote it.

samcarter‭ wrote 8 months ago · edited 8 months ago

The beauty of mathematics is that people from all around the world use a common notation system which allows them to communicate despite speaking different languages. This communication works best if one uses commonly used notation instead of making up new notations just because one prefers it. Your aim should be to make it as easy as possible for your readers to read your post. I'm very concerned that you call an edit, which tried to make your post easier to understand, abuse.

If you disagree with the edit, fine, roll it back, but don't call a reasonable edit abuse.