The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Probability Pill
Replies: 20   Last Post: Jan 31, 2013 7:23 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]

Posts: 12,012
Registered: 7/15/05
Re: Probability Pill
Posted: Dec 31, 2012 1:02 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

William Elliot wrote:
>quasi wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I meant _your_ source, where _you_ got the problem, not
>> >> the actual source.

>> >
>> >Email, if makes any difference for this group

>> Fine, and in that case you could have introduced the problem
>> by saying something like ...
>> In a private email, I was asked the following question ...
>> ... question ...
>> Of course you don't actually _have_ to reveal your source,
>> but by doing so, at least you dispel the false impression
>> that the problem is of your own creation.

>With that finally acceptable answer, did quo learn anything
>new that I hadn't already told you?

>> On the other hand, if someone (such as myself) asks you for
>> the nature of your source, it don't see why you would choose
>> to withhold that information.

>Why do you block your email address while others such as I,

I prefer to remain anonymous.

But I try to attribute problems and solutions to their source,
to the extent that I'm aware of the source.

Thus, if I ask about an exercise from a text, I would quote or
paraphrase the problem, and identify the author, title,
edition, and page number.

If I get a problem from a competition, I would indicate the
competition name, year, and problem number (or as much of that
information as I know).

If I am relaying a problem from another user in another forum,
I would identify the forum and username of the person in that
forum who posed the problem.

If I am discussing an unsolved problem then, provided I'm
aware that it's unsolved, I would indicate that.

If it's my own question, I don't need to identify the source
since I regard that as the default assumption. Of course, it
will often turn out that such a question is actually a known
question, and that's fine, but if I know such a source in
advance, I think it's only fair (both to the reader and to the
source) that I attribute the problem to that source.

Now I'm not saying that everyone has to follow those guidelines
but in your case, there have been quite a few situations where,
in my opinion, omitting any hint of attribution was deceptive,
making it look like the problem was one that you'd thought up.

>My response was appropriate to the quality of your unacademic
>asking copied here, for your convenience, below.

From quasi@null.set Thu Dec 27 02:47:23 2012

>>>...> I suspect that the above question is not actually yours.
>>>...> If that's the case, what is the actual source?
>>>...> Is it from a poster in another forum? If so, why do you
>>>...> omit mention of the poster and the forum?
>>>...> Is it from a book or math contest?
>>>...> Why do you repeatedly post questions that are not your
>>>...> own without giving credit to the source?

I stand by the above.

I would have taken it back if it turned out the problem was
your own (but as I suspected, it wasn't).


Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2017. All Rights Reserved.