>>555
Hello!
When it comes to any rule, Mathchan staff shall always take in consideration the perceived intent of the poster. Only posters that are perceived to be intentionally malicious will be met with a ban. Therefore, if a poster has good intentions but uploads something by mistake, or unintentionally posts something that Mathchan finds undesirable, or accidentally skirts Mathchan's rules without knowing so, their thread will be moved to an appropriate board and/or they will be warned why, but the poster will not be punished by a ban. If you are not repeatedly and delibarately trying to infringe Mathchan's rules, you should have no fear at all of getting banned. Any goodwill effort to contribute to the body of knowledge of Mathchan is welcomed and appreciated and any potential missteps will be met with leniency and not punishment.
When it comes to the specific rule you're quoting (i.e. \href{https://mathchan.org/rules#5}{Rule 5}), Mathchan only looks to host useful and valuable content. To be specific, Mathchan only looks to host content that is of \textbf{practical value} (i.e. guides, walkthroughs, explanations, tutorials, how-to's), or \textbf{organic discussion} that is in the interest of multiple people, and not just the OP. Without this rule, we would quickly become overwhelmed by those who are asking for something (e.g. "How do I do my homework?") and very few people would be contributing something. It's an order of magnitude easier to ask for something - especially with hard subjects like math and science - than it is to contribute something in these subjects. For this reason, on-topic boards can only be contributed to, and can never be solicited from. Creating a thread on Mathchan is supposed to be analogous to your lecture podium; you are supposed to showcase everything you know about what you are talking about, potentially answering any questions that posters in your thread might have. It doesn't make sense to assume a lecture podium and then ask your attendees to teach you something, nor does it make sense to assume a podium and then say nothing of value to the audience.
Classic examples that would violate Rule 5 because they are not considered sufficiently valuable to Mathchan are:
> a) I'm stuck on my homework. Any ideas?
> b) Looking for somebody to study math with. Here's my discord: Anon#3094
> c) Just graduated highschool. Should I go to engineering?
> d) Just made a website. Thoughts?
A simple way to turn around against Rule 5 is to offer back what normally you would ask for.
For example, the following would \textbf{not} violate Rule 5 because they attempt to offer something to Mathchan, instead of solicit something from Mathchan:
> a) I solved my homework. Here's how my solution goes...
> b) This thread is for the study of subject X. Resources: ... Useful links: ... IRC/Telegram/Discord: ...
> c) I went to engineering. Here's my experience and what you need to know if you want to go to engineering...
> d) Just made a website. Here's what you need to do to make a website like this...
NOTE: This only applies to normal on-topic boards and, of course, you certainly \textit{can} ask for homework help, look for somebody to study with, ask what to enroll for, or ask for site review on \href{https://mathchan.org/hr/}{/hr/ - Homework/Requests}, \href{https://mathchan.org/off/}{/off/ - Lounge/Off-Topic}, \href{https://mathchan.org/adv/}{/adv/ - Career Advice} and \href{https://mathchan.org/tc/}{/tc/ - Tech Consumerism} respectively.
When it comes to your specific example, it would, indeed, be covered by Rule 5, if you were to post it on \href{https://mathchan.org/math/}{/math/ - Mathematics}, because "Anybody who's reading this book wants to get into contact with me?" is not considered valuable content on that board, and it would be moved to \href{https://mathchan.org/off/}{/off/ - Lounge/Off-Topic}. If you think about it, the entire catalog could be filled with "Is anbody reading book \(X_k\)?", and there are only 150 thread slots available, so no discussion about any kind of math would be happening, and Mathchan would be reduced to a social meetup site. In order to make it comply with Rule 5, you can dedicate the thread to that particular book and discuss all problems and exercises in that thread, with any potential links to resources (or venues other than Mathchan (like Telegram) that may host such resources) being allowed in that case, because they are considered useful. It's a fairly minimal adjustment. You have to respect that Mathchan wants to be the primary place where discussion happens and not a social meetup site that would facilitate discussion happening elsewhere.
When it comes to contact info, it's not recommended that you share it until you find somebody to share it with, after you've had a discussion with them.
For example,
>A: "I've read that book and want to talk to you. Do you have an email?"
>B: "Yes, it's anon@ymous.com"
Nothing wrong with that.
If you offer your contact out of the blue
>"Has anybody read this book? Please email me: anon@ymous.com"
Or share your contact out of the blue
>"Here's my email: anon@ymous.com. I know that book."
It's likely to be interpreted as a violation of Rule 5 by the mod unless the mod decides from the context that you're looking to befriend another user who shares your interests. If it looks like you're trying to get something from the other user then that's not allowed. Putting your contact info without any context counts as advertisement by default and creating threads only looking to befriend other people does not count as valuable content on on-topic boards as per previous discussion.
\textbf{TL;DR}: Using Mathchan to discuss a particular book is allowed, but threads about meeting people who are reading a particular book outside of Mathchan are not allowed. Sharing contact with another user is allowed, but sharing contact for no reason, or without being asked about it first, is murky.