Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

I'm glad an answer was given before both of my topics were closed, the question related to understanding an algorithm and its terminology, whether that was on a programmatic, mathematical, or semantic level, we're all using words to communicate, so asking about a word related to an algorithm, programming, or math is not off topic.

There was no good (or accurate) reason given for either topic being closed. The discussion was useful, I learned from it, and so could anyone else. Maybe they could have added to it, if it wasn't closed.

Derangement or what? (StackOverflow)
Another name for a discrete set? (MathOverflow)

share|improve this question
The people that run SO and MSO don't run MathOverflow. – Gelatin Oct 23 '10 at 22:29

If you read the FAQ at MathOverflow, you'll see that they are not interested in basic questions of that sort. You wanted sometimes known as MathUnderflow.

share|improve this answer
Alright, I was following advice from the first thread by reposting at mathoverflow. But I don't see why the my question was closed on stackoverflow, because I tagged it with "algorithm". How does my question not relate to an algorithm? – op1 Oct 23 '10 at 22:43
I don't know the situation on MO, but as far as I observed math.SE is now seldom referred as Math Underflow. – kennytm Oct 23 '10 at 23:00
@user: Many SO users have been pointing people with basic questions to MathOverflow for a long time. Some of us have been trying to correct that, but we've met with limited success. The naming issue seems to be working against us. – dmckee Oct 23 '10 at 23:10

I think the problem with the question is that you asked "what is the term for this?" Which wasn't your real problem, you should have asked "I can only find 4, how come there's 9". It should have been trivial to figure this out with a piece of paper and a pencil. It is obvious now I trust, somebody showed you.

The math experts probably scoffed at the triviality of it. The SO experts may have thought a bit about "is there a different term than derangement", possibly concluding there isn't one. Afaik, derangement is a psychological term, describing a mental disorder. Nobody got to the algorithm part of the question after that hump.

Know what to ask for and formulate it well. Don't make up terms that sound like you know what you are talking about but only obfuscate the issue. Nobody want to test their language skills answering a question, egg on their face when they didn't know that "derangement" is standard verbiage in combinatorics. I trust it isn't but, like many SO contributors, I'm only a practitioner, never been a student.

It wasn't a good question. And thus got closed.

share|improve this answer
No, I actually wanted the term for it. I had already solved the problem, by coding my own algorithm, but didn't know what it was called. So I think terminology is relevant to the discussion of algorithms. Don't you? I didn't make up terms either, I was trying to describe the properties of what I was talking about, and used words which were as close to a definition as I could find. That's the best kind of question I can forumulate under the circumstances. – op1 Oct 23 '10 at 23:52
Why did you ask for the algorithm when you only wanted the term? Try – Uphill Luge Oct 24 '10 at 0:53
I didn't ask for an example of the algorithm. Whoever answered with their algorithm for a derangement edited my original question, and it's not really an english language question, its related to terminology which is pertinent to algorithms. – op1 Oct 24 '10 at 1:13
Slick trick, posting an answer to an off topic question and editing the question to make it on topic. is next. That about concludes my attempts to find a home for this question. – Uphill Luge Oct 24 '10 at 1:30
Why can't it be on topic at stackoverflow? Obviously it can be off topic everywhere, if people don't want to be objective about their interperetations. Like I said it's related to an algorithm. I know this because that's where my question is coming from. That's why I tagged it as such, and that's why tags are required. Isn't it? – op1 Oct 24 '10 at 2:43

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .