I re-read the linked post again. I can see why as curators, you don't want a bunch of threads repeating similar discussions.
FWIW: This question has been bothering me for years and I didn't find the thread when I search this Stack.
FWIW2: The answer to my question might reside in the linked thread, but in my read the net result is that opinions vary. Clearly ...
I can't say why the mod who did the deletion left that particular comment rather than some other wording. But that homework-like question is not really about a concept (other than "I'm stuck") and should probably have been closed rather than answered.
In the past, moderators removing such answers would emphasize that the deletion was temporary, and ...
As one of the close-voters, I guess I should speak up: I did not vote to close this question as a duplicate; instead, I voted to close as being primarily opinion-based and therefore not answerable in objective, scientific terms.
In those terms, I would say that the existing closure as a duplicate is a less strict response (in that it sends you to other ...
In general, if the owner of a post has provided clear information in the comments under it, then I feel it is perfectly acceptable to incorporate that information into the post itself.
This assumes, of course, that (i) the post owner has provided a clear and unambiguous meaning for the post, and the edit is only to clarify it, without altering it; and (ii) ...
There is no evidence that unicorns do exist. There is no evidence that unicorns do not exist. Therefore we must consider the possibility of the existence of unicorns. So has any research into unicorns ever been undertaken?
This is similar to your reasoning about an atom being a “universe”.
This is not how the scientific method works.
Well... to put it delicately, these are not anywhere near the mainstream. To put it less delicately, these are nutty questions.
This site is not the place to entertain this kind of unfounded speculations.
We prefer to reserve “spammer” for users who use their Stack Exchange accounts to post marketing links here. It’s not really any of our business if a user has a Twitter account which is used for selling things. For that matter, the network-wide consensus is that it’s just fine if a user has marketing links in their Stack Exchange profile (ahem). It doesn’...
You're looking at the all time leagues. The 'Reputation Change' you see there is the reputation change since the beginning of the site, so it's expected that that number matches.
When you look at the weekly league, you'll see that the 'Total Reputation' stays the same but the 'Reputation Change' is different: