"interesting enough": the OEIS is a "Big Tent" (but not an insatiable idol)

[Jon Awbrey]

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

i know we have a proof that all numbers are interesting --
so long as "number" means something in a well-founded set.

but i forget, is our space of sequences well-founded?

jon awbrey

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

Marc LeBrun wrote:
> 
> Lately there have been several messages expressing concerns about sequences
> being "interesting enough" to submit.  Let me cheerlead:
> 
> Just ask yourself, "Would I have felt this sequence was interesting if I
> had found it in the OEIS instead of computing it?".  If the answer's yes,
> I'd encourage you to go for submitting it, without worrying about
> "interesting enough".
> 
> In my experience, the OEIS has always quite consistently welcomed ALL
> reasonable sequence submissions.  Its stated goal is to include ALL
> interesting sequences, NOT only those that are "interesting enough"
> (whatever that means)!  If it is at least interesting to YOU then it's
> interesting, and you should definitely submit it.  In practice, if you've
> already got enough of a sequence to make a reasonable entry you should go
> ahead and submit it without worrying if it's interesting "enough"--it is by
> definition, since you were interested enough to generate it!
> 
> Conversely, if you're not interested, and you don't know if anyone else
> ever will be, then you shouldn't feel a strong compulsion to force yourself
> to construct a sequence just to submit it.
> 
> Of course almost always if you ask Neil he will be interested in obtaining
> a new sequence.  So, paradoxically, if it's close enough to bother asking
> about it's implicitly interesting (the interesting set contains its
> boundary, or something<;-).
> 
> The main reason to hesitate is if the submission will entail a bunch of
> additional work for someone or will otherwise detract from the value of the
> OEIS.  This obviously applies to making sloppy or erroneous submissions
> that will create an editorial burden, or produce lots of false hits with
> superseeker.  But it also applies to YOU making yourself do a bunch of
> extra work that you feel would have uncertain payoff.
> 
> So the decision to grind out more terms or associated sequences which you
> judge to be of uncertain interest ultimately just has to be weighed, in
> your best judgement, against moving on and doing something new and exciting
> that's more likely to result in submissions that will clearly be of
> definite interest.



o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o