<p>The OP's post does sound like an invitation to admire our CV-selves in the mirror -but it is totally boring to admire your self, it is preferable, say, to let others admire you. So I downvoted it, and I feel compelled to write an answer here so that people have the opportunity to downvote it -for balance.</p>

<p>It is not difficult to conclude that the atmosphere over at math.se is much more combative than in CV.  </p>

<p>My proposed explanation: consider the scientific world a statistician lives in, and the one that a mathematician lives in. </p>

<p>The statistician <em>starts</em> by acknowledging uncertainty, incomplete information, loose ends, you name it, as well as the imperfection and the inherent limits of the tools at his disposal in order to contain it, and therefore that, at the end of his efforts, they will ever remain.</p>

<p>No such thing in the mathematician's world: at the conceptual end of the scientific endeavor, things are either correct and exact, or not (that bits and pieces of failed attempts may be useful and re-used is certain - I am talking about the symbolic final stage). This, psychologically, is close to a "quest for the truth" (an abstract truth perhaps, but truth nevertheless), and every dispassionate observer of history, society and everyday life knows how heated the situation can become when people are "on a quest for the truth" (perhaps rightfully so, but I don't care much for value judgements here).</p>

<p>So philosophically, after all said and done mathematics is more of a binary "yes/no" situation, while statistics, no matter how rigorous and sophisticated mathematical machinery is used, is an "almost/maybe/to a certain degree" situation.</p>

<p>Now compare war and peace: war is much closer to a "yes/no" situation while peace is much closer to an "almost/maybe/to a certain degree" situation. Hence CV is more peaceful, and math.se is more combative.</p>
