[seqfan] Re: A098550.

[L. Edson Jeffery]

>We have a suggestion here that the a(0) term should be omitted,
>leaving offset 1. L. Edson Jeffery in a pink-box comment suggests
>changing the  offset to 1 without taking 0 out of the sequence.
>In my opinion, these  two arguments cancel out in favor of leaving
>the sequence as it is.

Well, I think your sequence would be nicer without 0 as the first term, but
your definition works. My "argument" was that the sequence (with or without
0) is a list and should have offset 1. For example, A098550 is similarly
defined and has offset 1.

Ed Jeffery