I don't agree at all. First of all, Rich has already put a brief mention of the fact that we discuss some OT topics. The description reads: << We are a group of people who enjoy math. Our topics range from digit puzzles to current research. We occasionally stray to word games, general science, and reviews of math-related movies. We have a computational bent. Our current traffic level is a few messages per day.

...

Of course no sample perfectly represents the experience of being on math-fun, but even a modest sample will probably hugely clarify the kind of place we are -- just for the purpose of prospective members' deciding if they even want to bother signing up and getting the real McCoy. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it. --Dan << I believe that any attempt at sampling would produce a result that is sort of good enough for some people and completely off-base for others. Let's pick some of the questions (and/or puzzles and/or problems) that have been answered, as you suggest. Then what about all the stuff that's not in the form of questions/puzzles/problems? Will people join and get annoyed about the off-topic replies? What counts as off-topic anyway? I might think it's irrelevant, and another member will (rightly) say that the "off-topic" stuff is even more valuable than the original (in his mind). Maybe we could curate the sample to try to keep it up to date, but that makes work (and I think you're trying to avoid making work for anyone and everyone, not just Rich and the new users). A lot of the people viewing a sampling of math-fun will be pretty smart people, I dare say smart enough to figure out what I just said about sampling bias. So they'll have to join the list anyway, see if they like it and un-join later.

...

________________________________________________________________________________________ It goes without saying that .