[seqfan] Re: R: Ombudsman needed for OEIS?

Donald Alan Morrison donmorrison at gmail.com
Thu Jan 27 17:50:49 CET 2011

Likewise, a "D" sequence would be a "demoted" sequence not usually
visible in searches -- pseudo-deleted.

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Donald Alan Morrison
<donmorrison at gmail.com> wrote:
> Sounds like a versioning problem.  Why not vote for visibility instead
> of deleting sequences.  New sequences would get an "N" prefix instead
> of "A", and then only be given an "A" prefix after "promotion" through
> a vote of some sort: a minimum threshold as discussed.
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:43 AM, N. J. A. Sloane <njas at research.att.com> wrote:
>> Klaus made some excellent arguments that an ombudsman is
>> unnecessary and may have a negative eefect.
>> On the other hand, people have written to me personally,
>> saying "The editors are kicking my sequences" or "Editor X
>> has been looking at a number of sequences I submitted
>> in 2008 and suggesting in the pink discussion boxes
>> that they should be deleted".
>> I don't want to have to resolve all these disputes myself.
>> That's why it seemed like a good idea to have an independent
>> person who would do this. Does anyone have a better solution?
>> Neil
>> _______________________________________________
>> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/

More information about the SeqFan mailing list