User blog comment:Ecl1psed276/BM2 Analysis - A Summary/@comment-30754445-20180709051740/@comment-35470197-20180711033048

@PsiCubed2

> I wonder if there are other people here, besides myself, who actually care about getting the actual math right. Are there? Or is everybody here content with bullshitting their way through and hoping no one will notice?

At least, I do care about it.

Also, I partially understand the reasonability of the very strange situation on "definitions in mind" and "analysis without precise definition or reviewing the accuracy" of BMS, because there is no original definition by Bashicu written in an explicit way. BMS "looks" very strong, and hence googologists naturally want to study it, hoping that Bashicu (or even themselves) will show a great definition in the future.

It looks a situation similar to that many googologists use great ordinal notations which have not been completely defined yet, as if they were trivially well-defined. It might be ok, because everyone has their own googology.

I summarised such problems on Bashicu Matrix System in my blog post here.

https://googology.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:P%E9%80%B2%E5%A4%A7%E5%A5%BD%E3%81%8Dbot/Summary_on_historical_background_of_BMS