# Edition rejected

This edition was reject.

The justification given is that

This edit deviates from the original intent of the post. Even edits that must make drastic changes should strive to preserve the goals of the post's owner

but I don't really understand how I deviated from the original answer.

The only thing I did was to fix the confusion done in the answer, because it uses the letters M and N to represent at the same time the sets (domain and range) and the sizes of those sets (so, positive integers).

I didn't change anything else.

For instance, the answer says "[...] function from M to N", which means that M and N are sets. And so, it is said "[...] consider M the set {1,2,...,M}", which means that M now is a integer or M is a recursive set (which obviously isn't the case).

When the PMF of the HGD (hypergeometric distribution) is defined, both M and N are also used as integer values (take a look at the quotient involving involving combinations in the middle of the answer).

The way Boldyreva's paper avoids that issues is by defining M and N as integers and then defining the domain and the range as [M] and [N], respectively. And that is exactly what I done.

This is the first time I complain about a edit rejection and I'm doing that just because I think this edition is really necessary. So, I'd be glad to know what is wrong with it or, in case there is nothing wrong, it would be great if it was accepted.

Thank you very much.

1. Original:

where the number of marked balls is $|M|$ and unmarked balls is $|N|-|M|$.

where the number of marked balls is $M$ and unmarked balls is $N-M$.

and

1. Original:

Start with the entire domain $M$ and range $N$. Call $y \leftarrow \frac{max(N)}{2}$ our range gap.

Start with the entire domain $[M]$ and range $[N]$. Call $y \leftarrow \frac{N}{2}$ our range gap.