<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; "><DIV><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;">Henry Gould:</SPAN></FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;"><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></SPAN></FONT></DIV><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;">... These matters like some other recreational sequences are just too vague for my taste. Likewise the planet numbers, atomic weights, binding energies, etc. and most physical constants. They just do not belong in OEIS, which ought to be concerned with validly defined MATHEMATICAL sequences, not artificially contrived and religious numbers...</SPAN></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;"><BR style=""></SPAN></FONT><DIV><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;">Sure. But even with validly defined MATHEMATICAL sequences we've heard differences of opinion on which sequences are more, or less, worthy. At present the OEIS welcome page suggests only that "</SPAN></FONT><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;">the number sequence should be well-defined, of general interest and ideally it should be infinite."</SPAN></FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;"><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></SPAN></FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;">I think that's as it should be: A broad definition for broad appeal.</SPAN></FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;"><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></SPAN></FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;">Most of the aforementioned sequences fail because they are not well-defined or infinite. They are most certainly of general interest.</SPAN></FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;"><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></SPAN></FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;">I collect music on my computer and I try to maintain it as a database: Basically, a small number of "tags" to identify it in time and space and an effort to avoid "duplicates" (not as easy as it might seem). I've suffered from all the aches and pains that any obsessive/compulsive collector/organizer of information must necessarily endure: The limitations of personal inclination and somewhat arbitrary categorization to capture some essence of a large, complex, moving body. Cutting the arms and legs from that body would certainly help but, in my mind, it's not a trophy worth having.</SPAN></FONT></DIV><DIV><FONT class="Apple-style-span" size="5"><SPAN class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 18px;"><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></SPAN></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>