OEIS on vacation in December

[Jonathan Post]

I must also confess to being one of the "overzealous contributors" and
"prime offenders." I am also one of the overzealous "semiprime offenders."
Be that as it may, I have endeavored to learn as many different areas of
Mathematics as my attention and capabilities allow, and to submit sequences
in as many different areas as I find in books, journals, or my collaborative
pursuits.  I have no problem with Dr. Neil J. A. Sloane's tastes nor dicta.
He has been immensely helpful and supportive in every way.

For those, such as the nice and enthusiastic Zak Seidov who feel rejected, I
assure them that my experience is that rejection is not personal, nor
inherently damaging. I only achieved my hundreds of publication,
presentations, and broadcasts by having experienced over 5000 (5*10^3)
rejection notes and rejection letters from editors of magazines, journals,
and books before I learned how to properly deal with rejection.  My Physics
professor wife and I just took an all-day screenwriting seminar in Hollwood,
where the professor from UCLA Film School summarized: "Rejection is not the
end of the process.  It is only the beginning."

Finally, the greatest joy of the Web is its use as "collaborationware."  The
OEIS is not as well-known as collaborative efforts such as Wikipedia.  Yet
it is in many ways the greatest collaborative instrument on the internet,
and Neil deserves a MacArthur Fellowship for its human, scholarly, and
social impact. Let a million flowers bloom.

-- Jonathan Vos Post

On 12/5/06, Rob Pratt <Rob.Pratt at sas.com> wrote:
>
> Zak,
>
> You are one of the "prime" offenders.  A search on "prime seidov" returns
> 1174 sequences.
>
> Rob
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: zak seidov [mailto:zakseidov at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 11:11 AM
> To: Rob Pratt; seqfan at ext.jussieu.fr
> Subject: RE: OEIS on vacation in December
>
>
> --- Rob Pratt <Rob.Pratt at sas.com> wrote:
>
> > Because overzealous contributors have swamped the database with
> > sequences that have a contrived relationship to prime numbers.
> >
> > Rob Pratt
>
> OK!
>
> But dear Rob, dear Neil, dear co-editors, and dear seqfans!!
>
> Why not simply to reject such "probably not"
> submissions???!!!
>
> I "have swamped the list with this Q"
> and have never got a reasonable explanation....
>
> WADR (=with all duty respect),
> Zak
>
>
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thomas Baruchel [mailto:tbaruchel at free.fr]
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 9:19 AM
> > To: seqfan at ext.jussieu.fr
> > Subject: Re: OEIS on vacation in December
> >
> > On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, N. J. A. Sloane wrote:
> > > - don't send in sequences that you made up (unless
> > >   they are really beautiful - and if they
> > >   are base dependent or involve primes
> > >   they are probably not)
> >
> > Just a question ; I do understand very well why base dependent
> > sequences aren't really beautiful, but I sincerely wonder why
> > sequences which involve prime numbers "are probably not". Why? Aren't
> > they the most beautiful ones?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Baruchel
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
> http://new.mail.yahoo.com
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.seqfan.eu/pipermail/seqfan/attachments/20061205/bc3becfc/attachment-0002.htm>