Talk:Stewards/Elections 2022/Questions

Uniqueness / ℙ[edit]

Leaderboard, can the formula be translated to the following text? "What can you do that no steward can currently do?" And is this really equivalent to "most helpful" in your opinion? ToBeFree (talk) 22:35, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I'm confused. If "x" is a unique ability only the candidate has, and numbers are other abilities: The inner bracket could be {1,2,3,x}∩{1,2,3,10,11}={1,2,3}. The outer bracket would then be {1,2,3,10,11}\{1,2,3} = {10,11}. The result is then {1,2,3,x}\{10,11}={1,2,3,x}. The formula can be simplified to "S". Where is the error in my understanding? ToBeFree (talk) 23:00, 15 January 2022 (UTC) The formula was fixed; this comment refers to the original version that did actually turn out to be incorrect. ToBeFree (talk) 19:33, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like ℙ is a prime number. The "math" part seems really unnecessary for this question. Legoktm (talk) 07:01, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree and Legoktm: I think it actually means the power set. I did have to think about it, but it's an excellent answer when one thinks about it. What I suspect @AntiCompositeNumber: was saying is that they can do every combination of the tasks a steward would do. In plain language, being extremely versatile. The rest of my answer to your question comes later on.
@Legoktm: Notice that I said "In other words" - this means that while I would consider their answer to this section while scoring their candidacy, it is not compulsory to give an answer and indeed a perfect mark can theoretically be obtained without it. This is a steward election after all. Actually it's easier to word this computationally:

 
:public HashSet<Tasks> legoktm()
:{
:int steward_pointer;
:HashSet<Tasks> result; // final result
:HashSet<Tasks>[] all-steward-tasks; // array of the tasks all stewards can do
:for (int i = 0; i < all-steward-tasks.length; i++)
:{
:if (i != steward_pointer)
:{
:result.add(all-steward.tasks[i]);
:}
:}
:return result;
:}
:

@TheresNoTime: No, your answer completely missed the mark. Again, note that I'm simply likely to ignore rather than penalise that from my perspective - there are many valid ways to answer this question and indeed some of them didn't consider the mathematical side at all, as you can see.
@ToBeFree: Answering the second part of your question, I think the main confusion I'm seeing is that S (and S_i) are sets/lists and are not numbers - I tried to word this carefully. That being said, you're right and found a nasty bug where the result will simply be the null set ∅. I've fixed it and simplified the formula - so sorry for this bug! And yes, there is a degree of ambiguity on whether that's "most helpful" that I've left for the candidates to interpret. Leaderboard (talk) 11:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The real question is why did you include the "math" part that is completely unnecessary and you yourself know that it is? Sakretsu (炸裂) 13:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As the sets/lists seem to be combined as "union", e.g. {1,2} and {2,3} for two stewards would end up as {1,2,3}, I have intentionally combined the abilities of the steward team for my example above: It would else be pretty unreadable. ToBeFree (talk) 19:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Legoktm is correct, on both counts. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 21:27, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rschen7754's question[edit]

For transparency, I modified Rschen7754's question by adding a new line before their signature so that the responses could be bullet pointed more clearly. I hope this is okay 🙂 -- TNT (talk • she/her) 23:48, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification[edit]

Hi @BRPever:

Didn't want to clog up the question page with a clarification or use up my other question, so I was just hoping you could expand on why questions for reconfirmation in the same structure as 1st-time stewards would cause problems but not here? I had a look in the Steward reconfirmations last time, and either a large minority or a narrow majority of questions asked in the midst of the general comments/discussion/(!)votes did not get answered by the Stewards in question (whereas the questions for new Steward candidates had an excellent answer rate) Nosebagbear (talk) 10:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I think if the concerns are legitimate, they will likely just get more attention on the individual confirmation page, so I am not sure if there is an actual need for such a page. But if the wider community feels like such a page is needed, I am not against it. I hope this answers your question. Thanks :) --BRP^ever 13:02, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]