In the recent discussion with Emilio Pisanty I was deprived of the opportunity to write comments. I'd like to know the explanation. Which rule did I violate?
EDIT. After John Rennie's comment I found that the possibility to add comments returned back to me. But the problem, I believe, did not disappear. @EmilioPisanty accuses me in cheating here
You ask for "proofs of the periodic table" without defining what you mean by that term and, frankly, that's little more than an intellectually dishonest bait-and-switch trap.
it's the fact that you leave a yawning abyss of ambiguity in what it is you're actually asking which you then use to say "no, see, that's not what I was asking"
And at the same time people here "rolled back" my words and vote to delete them. This is not called honesty. I explained what I believe is importat for understanding my question in my post at Mathoverflow (to which I gave a reference here). And I tried to explain this here, at physics.stackexchange.com, in what was "rolled back" later. But it's impossible to explain anything if your interlocutors delete your explanations all the way. And I would say, it's immoral.
I believe apart from the rules of this forum there are the common rules for all people in all discussions. And one of them is not shutting the mouth of the interlocutor. My question is
whether this rule is valid here?