Earlier quoted context omitted.
> To be fair, it is less applicable to math papers, than other topics, but academic papers are not easy to get information from, the main thing they are supposedly exist for. You say that this is less applicable to math than other topics, which is funny—as a mathematician, I'd think that it's more applicable! In the strictest sense of the word, the purpose of a math paper is not to allow others to get information fro…
I don't see where we disagree. That's pretty much exactly why my points are less relevant for math papers: they are supposed to be self-contained. And while the result is sometimes interesting and can be put into TL;DR, I'd say in the most cases the entire point is reading the proof. No, I mean there definitely were cases when I was just wanted to see the final formula and skip the derivation, and I'd absolutely want…
I'd certainly disagree that math papers are supposed to be self-contained (at least they are not supposed to be completely self-contained, or else they'd balloon to ridiculous size), but I think I misunderstood your comment:
> To be fair, it is less applicable to math papers, than other topics, but academic papers are not easy to get information from, the main thing they are supposedly exist for.
I read it as "it is less applicable to math papers than other academic papers that they are not easy to get information from." I think, based on your follow-up, that you meant instead "it is less applicable to math papers than other academic papers that they exist for getting information from." My apologies for misunderstanding.