I've just seen a number of posts in the Low Quality Posts queue which appear to have multiple identical automatic comments from a reviewer:    (now deleted; 10K+ only)  (now deleted; 10K+ only)  (now deleted; 10K+ only)   Given that all the comments have almost identical timestamps, this seems to be a bug.   Obviously, I can just flag these for deletion, but I haven't yet because I want to make sure non-moderators can see this behavior.
came in Low Quality Posts review which was  as "This is commentary on another post, not an answer" by *. But the comment was added 5 times automatically on behalf of that user.        First four comments' time is 2013-07-15 10:23:18Z while the last one's time is 2013-07-15 10:23:19Z. Those comments are still exist. 10K+ users can see that.  Is this a bug or something else?  * Because the comment is added on behalf of that user.
Please stop using SoftwareEngineering.SE as your toilet bowl Stack Overflow users have been using the "off topic - belongs on SoftwareEngineering.SE" close reason as an alternative to all the other close reasons. It'd be helpful if people actually read the FAQ and the six  before voting to migrate questions like:   , no redeeming value to favorite lists that become argumentative , "help my exact situation" questions are too localized , fails 5 out of the 6 guidelines , fails 4 out of 6 , too localized and too vague , too broad   Absent a reversal of the Stack Overflow community from viewing SoftwareEngineering.SE as the Stack Overflow cesspool, can the "off topic - belongs on SoftwareEngineering.SE" close reason be removed in favor of manual migration by moderators who can actually spend the 10 seconds to determine if the question should be closed outright first?    To say that SoftwareEngineering.SE is such a nebulous place and nobody knows what its scope is as the reason why crappy questions keep getting migrated there is to miss the point. Good questions are good questions on all of the sites, and questions that are too vague, that are too argumentative, too localized, and too broad are universal close reasons. There is no special dispensation for SoftwareEngineering.SE to have bad questions, even if you personally think the questions on there suck.  Even the six subjective guidelines for subjective questions are universal guidelines: they affect all sites. So even if you had no idea what the consequences of using the "off topic - belongs on SoftwareEngineering.SE" close reason were, there are still all of the other close reasons for which bad questions, like the ones above, can be closed. GOTO still considered harmful? Everyone is aware of Dijkstra's  (also  .html transcript and  .pdf) and there has been a formidable push since that time to eschew the goto statement whenever possible. While it's possible to use goto to produce unmaintainable, sprawling code, it nevertheless remains in . Even the advanced  control structure in Scheme can be described as a sophisticated goto.  What circumstances warrant the use of goto? When is it best to avoid?  As a followup question: C provides a pair of functions, setjmp and longjmp, that provide the ability to goto not just within the current stack frame but within any of the calling frames. Should these be considered as dangerous as goto? More dangerous?    Dijkstra himself regretted that title, for which he was not responsible. At the end of  (also  .pdf) he wrote:     Finally a short story for the record.   In 1968, the Communications of the ACM   published a text of mine under the   title "The goto statement considered   harmful", which in later years would   be most frequently referenced,   regrettably, however, often by authors   who had seen no more of it than its   title, which became a cornerstone of   my fame by becoming a template: we   would see all sorts of articles under   the title "X considered harmful" for   almost any X, including one titled   "Dijkstra considered harmful". But   what had happened? I had submitted a   paper under the title "A case against   the goto statement", which, in order   to speed up its publication, the   editor had changed into a "letter to   the Editor", and in the process he had   given it a new title of his own   invention! The editor was Niklaus   Wirth.   A well thought out classic paper about this topic, to be matched to that of Dijkstra, is , by Donald E. Knuth. Reading both helps to reestablish context and a non-dogmatic understanding of the subject. In this paper, Dijkstra's opinion on this case is reported and is even more strong:     Donald E. Knuth: I believe that by presenting such a   view I am not in fact disagreeing   sharply with Dijkstra's ideas, since   he recently wrote the following:   "Please don't fall into the trap of   believing that I am terribly   dogmatical about [the go to   statement]. I have the uncomfortable   feeling that others are making a   religion out of it, as if the   conceptual problems of programming   could be solved by a single trick, by   a simple form of coding discipline!" I am creating a type of adventure map. Once you enter the map, you step on some pressure plates that are supposed to seamlessly close the wall behind you. For some reason this command does not work when in a command block or just in text. Here is the command:  /fill -17 4 -109 -18 5 109 minecraft:light_gray_concrete   The output it gives me is "That position is not loaded". I am on a singleplayer superflat world in 1.14.3. Any help would be very appreciated! I want to enable GPU rendering, but there is no option in User Preferences > System:    Why is this? How can I get cycles to render using my GPU? Why do single-author community wiki answers (or questions?) link to revisions, rather than to the author's profile? Possible Duplicate:             Looking at  , I noticed something peculiar: Community Wiki posts* with only one author have not one, but two different links to the revisions page.    Is this entirely necessary? When clicking on the author's name in this case, I entirely would expect to be brought to the author's profile, rather than to the (potentially one-item-long) revisions list.   *(maybe only answers? couldn't find any good single-author CW question references) I am not very familiar with databases and the theories behind how they work.  Is it any slower from a performance standpoint (inserting/updating/querying) to use Strings for Primary Keys than integers? How to make mesh lights work in Blender Eevee? The closest I can get to making mesh lights affect their environment in Blender Eevee is giving them an Emission material and turning on "Bloom". But this isn't emitting proper light, it just looks like it is, but it doesn't light the surroundings whatsoever.     I would like to be able to light a scene with meshes without having to put point lamps everywhere just to make them emit light. What is the differences between &> and 2>&1 There are two forms of redirection the standard output and standard error into standard output. But which one is better? and why the &amp;&gt; is considered the perfect?  I can't find what is the differences so that many tutorials and even bash manual state that  &amp;&gt; is better!   So Why shall I use &amp;&gt; and not 2&gt;&amp;1  Mainly using bash shell    EDIT: Thanks for commentors   Only >&amp; works in csh or tcsh  In ksh only 2>&amp;1 works.  dash use >file 2>&amp;1 redirection only  Then which one to use to ensure my script is compatible with other systems whatever the used shells are! In Mootools, I'd just run if ($('target')) { ... }.  Does if ($('#target')) { ... } in jQuery work the same way? Finding an angle within an 80-80-20 isosceles triangle Continuity of $\sin(x)/x$ Is $\sin(x)/x$ continuous at $x=0$,(perfectly, not tends to)? The function has right hand and left hand limit same and equals 1 but what happens at perfect zero?it should be undefined. Is it? Show that if $ \ A \cup B = A$ and $ \ A\cap B = A$ then $ \ A = B$ Question:  Show that if $ \ A \cup B = A$ and $ \ A\cap  B = A$ then $ \ A = B$  My attempt:  Proof by contradiction:  Assume $ \ A \cup B = A$ and $ \ A\cap  B = A$ and $ \ A \neq B$   Case 1: $ \exists \ x \in A, x\notin B$  If $ x \in A \implies x\in A \cap B \implies x \in A \ and \  x\in B  \implies x\in B$, a contradiction.   Case 2: $ \exists \ x \in B, x\notin A$  If $ \ x \in B \implies x\in A \cup B \implies x\in A$, since $ \ A \cup B = A$. Contradiction.   Is this approach correct? Could someone please show me how to do a direct proof? How do you write this in LaTeX: Need to get logfile smaller Why is it called the Millennium Falcon? find all the members of A4/K Let K={(1),(12)(34),(13)(24),(14)(23)} show that K is a normal subgroup of the alternating group of degree A4 and find all the members of A4/K and write down the group table for A4/K.   i know that K is the Klein four group and i have already proven it is a normal subgroup but i need a start on approaching the A4/K part of this question no direct answers are necessary,just ideas thank you! :) Why is using a wild card with a Java import statement bad? It is much more convenient and cleaner to use a single statement like  import java.awt.*;   than to import a bunch of individual classes  import java.awt.Panel; import java.awt.Graphics; import java.awt.Canvas; ...   What is wrong with using a wildcard in the import statement? The ending I got is :      the genocide   When I reset my file, my past choices still take effect. I want to start a clean run.  I don't want to buy the game again, what do I do? Automatically determine tags while writing a question Can we modify "Ask question" to automatically suggests tags based on your question content.   So instead that user needs to type "team-foundation-server" or "TFS" or "TeamFoundationServer" he will see list of tags auto-populated with ajax which he (or she) can then select and it will be associated with the question. So basically only thing we need is code which will cross-match question content with list of known tags while user is typing and display results in some nice ajax-enabled list/cloud/whatever UI control. This should be separate control for tags suggestions so user still has option to use standard tag list input to type-in tags.  In this case, instead of three (or more) tag variations we would have only one tag for Team-Foundation-Server. Inner product of two continuous maps is continuous Let f,g be continuous maps of S in $\mathbb{R}^n$, to $\mathbb{R}^m$. Show the inner product h(x) = $\langle f(x), g(x)\rangle$ is continuous.  My attempt: Since f,g are continuous, their product is a continuous mapping, so for $\epsilon \gt 0\: t.e\:  \delta \gt 0$ such that $\parallel x - a\parallel \lt \delta $ implies $\parallel \langle f(x),g(x)\rangle - \langle f(a)g(a)\rangle \parallel \le\parallel f(x)g(x) - f(a)g(a)\parallel \lt \epsilon$ by schwartz inequality.