[seqfan] Re: A139414

[Robert G. Wilson, v]

Et al,

    Ditto to these comments by David. The sequences I am tire of are some
multiple of triangulars, the squares, etc.  Doesn't any one read the intro
to the 'Handbook' or the 'Encyclopedia' any more.

    Just because we have at our disposal an excellent search tool is no
reason to gum it up with "candy" sequences.

Bob.

David Wilson wrote:

>Honestly, folks, if I were inclined, I could take the OEIS out to A999999 in 
>a day or so.
>
>Really, there should be some reason to submit.
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Eric Angelini" <Eric.Angelini at kntv.be>
>To: "Sequence Fanatics Discussion list" <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
>Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 7:13 AM
>Subject: [seqfan] Re: A139414
>
>
>
>  
>
>>these sequences should remain, because of
>>    
>>
>  the 'E' of OEIS,
>
>... in my arms, Benoît !
>;-)
>Best,
>É.
>
>
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu
>[mailto:seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu] De la part de Benoît Jubin
>Envoyé : lundi 2 février 2009 22:27
>À : Sequence Fanatics Discussion list
>Objet : [seqfan] Re: A139414
>
>Dear all,
>
>After having used the OEIS and its webcam for a while, I think there
>are hundreds, even thousands, of totally uninteresting sequences in
>the OEIS.  I first thought they were a stain on the OEIS, making
>exterior people think it was a place crowded with numerologists and
>pseudo-scientists.  And this puzzled me since I appreciate much this
>wonderful tool and the work of all its editors and contributors.
>
>Nevertheless, I think that these sequences should remain, because of
>the 'E' of OEIS, that is, the will to be encyclopedic, or universal,
>even towards the less interesting.  Also, we never know if a sequence
>won't turn out to be of particular interest in the future (the history
>of mathematics is filled with such examples).
>
>This was my humble opinion, somewhere between the clumsy and the
>obvious.  Also, I'm aware that sometimes, considering a sequence
>uninteresting only reveals my ignorance.
>
>Regards,
>Benoit Jubin
>
>
>
>On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 8:04 AM, N. J. A. Sloane <njas at research.att.com> 
>wrote:
>  
>
>>Joerg,
>>
>>I already deleted A139414 and A155814 once,
>>but three people objected (Bagula, Smith, Seidov), so I
>>reinstated them.  That was sufficient reason, I felt.
>>
>>Neil
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.16/1926 - Release Date: 1/30/2009 
>5:31 PM
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>
>  
>