<p>I think this question was closed incorrectly: <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/40808/how-to-get-an-introductory-understanding-of-machine-learning/">Is a strong background in maths a total requisite for ML?</a> This asked, "Is a strong background in maths a total requisite for ML? Should I try and fill in the blanks of my maths before continuing with ML? Can self learning really work for just a developer without any hard computer science background?"</p>

<p>It was closed as an exact duplicate of <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/18973/can-you-recommend-a-book-to-read-before-elements-of-statistical-learning">Book for reading before Elements of Statistical Learning?</a> This asked, "I want to digest Elements of Statistical Learning... I don't have enough knowledge to understand it. Can you recommend a book that is a better introduction to the topics in the book?"</p>

<p>In other words, the new question asks, "Is X something I need to do first?" The old question says "I have decided I need to use method Y to do Z. Please help me find the resources to do method Y." They seem quite different to me even if you assume X=Z and that there is only one method Y for accomplishing this. Neither my answer nor the comment by John Moeller made those assumptions, and these would not have fit the previous question. The answers to the previous question might be helpful, but they are not answers to the new question. </p>

<p>So, what was gained by closing this question? What was lost was the ability for people to add other answers to the new question which don't fit the old question. Please reopen this question.</p>
