[seqfan] Re: Boubaker polynomials?

Olivier Gerard olivier.gerard at gmail.com
Sat Dec 5 02:45:33 CET 2009

Dear SeqFans,

As Mr Rahmanov is a new member, it is a good time to restate for him
and a few others
a few rules and advices about the way to contribute to this mailing list :

1 -  EDIT your post, especially when replying to a thread. Only keep
what is important
to understand your answer, most readers have already received the
previous message
and can refer to it.  Better less than too much. Do not resend large tables.
Try to write your commentaries just below the parts you want to comment.

2 - Be on TOPIC - Always change the mail title when you change the
subject. Try to keep
different subjects in different thread. Split your contribution in two
mails if needed. But also
don't be cryptic : give sufficient context and motivation for your
contribution. Can I add
precise references or links to the OEIS ? Should I post on seqfan or
in private ?

3 - Take your TIME.  Re-read at least 2 times what you send.  Integer
sequences will still
be there tomorrow, even next week.  Being the first to remark a
problem in a previous
post is an empty trophy.  You can also be ashamed by a blunder due to
Check your computations, if possible on another system or language,
try to find a
reference. Try to think about a post in seqfan as you should when
submitting a sequence
or a comment. Remember also seqfan mail is archived. You can refer to
this archive
when looking for previous discussions of the same topics.  If you know you have
trouble with scientific english, you can always add the native
language version of your text
together with the english version so that other members will have the
to rephrase difficult and critical parts of your posts.

4 - Post for a good REASON : Should I post on seqfan or in private ?
Am I overreacting ? Am I defensive ? Am I just wounded in my ego ?
Haven't I already written a message about this today ?
Am I the administrator of this list ? Am I just saying I agree ?
Am I repeating myself without real purpose ?
Can my writing be interpreted as harsh or unrespectful ?  Is there
some research I can
do first, so that I can give more substance to my post ?

with my best regards,

Olivier GERARD

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 20:14, Haidar Rahmanov <hrahmanov at gmail.com> wrote:
> The Boubaker polynomials can be seen in the links:
[list of references]

> there is no  buzz about them.

Dear Mr Rahmanov, giving a list of references does not show there is no buzz.
It only shows that some scientists use this terminology.

> they are also said to solve some equations. What is the problem with them?

Time will tell if this terminology spread in wider circles and new
links and properties
are discovered.

> Thanks
> 2009/12/4, Antti Karttunen <antti.karttunen at gmail.com>:
>> On 12/4/09, seqfan-request at list.seqfan.eu <seqfan-request at list.seqfan.eu>
>> wrote:

[ Large UNEDITED content removed ]


More information about the SeqFan mailing list