Re permanents / twin prime conjecture / OEIS :: Wouter's seconding to Neil

[wouter meeussen]

this is not an excuse, apology nor rebuttal:
Neil, you are right.

Please give me (us?) the nescessary time to think things through
and gauge the other's opinion using this seqfan forum.
The EIS is better off with the benefit of some time
between 'creation' and submission.

It should not fall on your shoulders to do the formatting,
and at the end of this thread about (0,1)-matrices,
(both with and without the 'singular' condition),
the nicely formatted sequences will come your way. Promise.

Wouter.




----- Original Message -----
From: "N. J. A. Sloane" <njas at research.att.com>
To: <seqfan at ext.jussieu.fr>
Cc: <njas at research.att.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2003 10:02 PM
Subject: Re permanents / twin prime conjecture / OEIS


>
> Dear Seqfans,
> In about 10 minutes there will be a new version
> of the OEIS which is more-or-less up-to-date.
>
> In the past 24 hours there have been a lot of emails posted
> to this list about permanents and determinants of (0,1) matrices,
> and also about the twin prime conjecture and Cino's sequences.
> I did not search through these messages for possible
> updates to the OEIS (well, I tried to, but there were
> too many messages and it was usually unclear which
> sequence they were referring to).
>
> If there are updates that are needed, please send them in using the
> usual web page.
>
> There are a lot of new sequences from Cino that are in the OEIS.
> I found them somewhat unclear, and the connection with the
> twin prime conjecture was not mentioned.  So I marked most
> of them as "uned".
>
>
>
> Another thing:  if you submit a long-winded and incoherent
> comment on some sequence, full of ungrammatical sentences,
> misspellings and unclear remarks, don't be surprised if
> I do not use it!
>
> And another: I find myself making the same corrections to
> sequences from certain people over and over.  After I have
> made the same correction (for example, reformatting sequences
> based on triangles, correcting misspellings, etc.)
> 40 times I get a little tired of doing it.
>
> If you start to notice that your sequences are being silently rejected,
> that may be the reason.
>
> I recommend that you always compare the edited versions
> of the sequences as they appear in the OEIS with what you submitted.
> And learn from the changes!   This applies especially to
> people who have been submitting sequences for a long time.
>
> Now would be a good time to learn how to prepare your
> sequences in the correct style.
>
> I have recently had to give out several yellow cards (to use
> football (soccer) terminology).  Don't make me give out any red cards.
>
> NJAS
>
>
>