http://openproblemgarden.org/forum_topic/question_about_solving_something Comments for "Question about 'solving' something" en http://openproblemgarden.org/forum_topic/question_about_solving_something#comment-7091 <p>Sorry. And thanks, I will follow this procedure next time!</p> <p>Best, Nieke</p> Thu, 24 Nov 2011 17:57:30 +0100 niekeaerts comment 7091 at http://openproblemgarden.org http://openproblemgarden.org/forum_topic/question_about_solving_something#comment-7087 <p>Sorry for slow response. The garden is definitely in use, only a bit slow moving right now. For that particular problem, read my comment there. As a general rule: we usually mark the problem as solved only after the paper about it goes through a peer-review process -- but definitely one should wait till somebody "in the know" verifies his proof or counterexample. </p> <p>Best wishes, Robert</p> Thu, 24 Nov 2011 16:35:23 +0100 Robert Samal comment 7087 at http://openproblemgarden.org http://openproblemgarden.org/forum_topic/question_about_solving_something#comment-7085 <p>As nobody responded, I just changed the solved-identity. I guess, if this garden is still in use, now I'll get a response ;)</p> Thu, 24 Nov 2011 15:33:41 +0100 niekeaerts comment 7085 at http://openproblemgarden.org http://openproblemgarden.org/forum_topic/question_about_solving_something So, I guess I have found two counterexamples for the 5-cycle double cover conjecture given in the garden (http://garden.irmacs.sfu.ca/?q=op/strong_5_cycle_double_cover_conjecture) and I am a little afraid to use the 'solved' option. Since no one has looked at/checked my stuff. What is the normal procedure for this? Thanks, Nieke (newbie) http://openproblemgarden.org/forum_topic/question_about_solving_something#comment Wed, 23 Nov 2011 13:33:28 +0100 niekeaerts 37363 at http://openproblemgarden.org