On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Michael Dewey wrote:
> The thing I find most rude on the list is not the occasional abrupt postings
> by people who are obviously having a bad day but the number of fairly long
> exchanges which end unresolved as the OP never bothers to post a conclusion
> and we
At 01:08 20/08/2010, Spencer Graves wrote:
What do you think about adding a "No RTFM"
policy to the R mailing lists? Per, "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM":
Spencer,
You raise an interesting point but the responses
to your post remind us that people (and indeed
whole cultures) are not all
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 5:17 AM, wrote:
> - Also, "?glm" does come over as pretty rude,
>
Personally I've always seen the '?fun' answers as appropriate and
straight to the point. There's no need to type a nice sounding phrase
à la française just to express 'see the ?glm reference'. A
'requiremen
vin Simpson [gavin.simp...@ucl.ac.uk]
Sent: 23 August 2010 18:37
To: ted.hard...@manchester.ac.uk
Cc: r-devel@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [Rd] No RTFM?
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 03:22 +0100, ted.hard...@manchester.ac.uk wrote:
>
> [3] I have tried to argue for a moderate and flexible spirit in
>
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 03:22 +0100, ted.hard...@manchester.ac.uk wrote:
>
> [3] I have tried to argue for a moderate and flexible spirit in
> what is advised in the Posting Guide. I am very uncomfortable
> about proposals as prescriptive and rigid as yours seem to be.
> Users, especial
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 7:04 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> I can tell. I wish sessionInfo would just grab the locale information.
>
Here it does so by default: locale info is included in sessionInfo
output. Regards
Liviu
> sessionInfo()
R version 2.10.1 (2009-12-14)
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
locale:
[1]
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 9:22 PM, Ted Harding
wrote:
>
> (with Cc: to r-devel)
> I presume you mean "sessionInfo()". "systemInfo()" hasn't been
> mentioned so far, I think.
>
brain fart. I'm old, you know :)
>. I am questioning your proposal
> that
> 1. Every question to r-help shou
On 22-Aug-10 23:29:39, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Dude:
> What's so objectionable about filling in the output of
>>systemInfo()
> ??
> What particular piece is too onerous to ask of people who
> are asking questions?
> --
> Paul E. Johnson
> Professor, Political Science
> 1541 Lilac Lane, Room 504
> Un
I agree with most of what has been said. And before I go any further
I really do appreciate the work that goes on here.
I think those who are prone to be overly terse and have a tendency to
post RTFM should take a piece of advice from the posting guide..."type
4*runif(1) at the R prompt, and wait
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 9:49 PM, Ted Harding
wrote:
> "People won't mind"? If R-help ends up telling me exactly what to do,
> I shall leave the list. I mean it. For good.
>
At a minimum it already does so:
"PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide co
On 22-Aug-10 18:31:46, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Hey Ben:
> One of my colleagues bought your book and was reading it during a
> faculty meeting last Tuesday. Everybody kept asking what's that?
>
> If you know how to put it in the wiki, would you please do it and let
> us know where it is. I was invo
Hey Ben:
One of my colleagues bought your book and was reading it during a
faculty meeting last Tuesday. Everybody kept asking what's that?
If you know how to put it in the wiki, would you please do it and let
us know where it is. I was involved with an R wiki about 5 or 6 years
ago, but comple
I've stayed in by back seat in the spectators so far, but I feel
a comment may be helpful here.
I'm in close sympathy with Hadley Wickham's comment on a "previous
suggestion by a regular contributor" [Spencer Graves] (below) and
with the comment by Spencer himself.
We are a community with a varie
I've answered many email posts by copying and editing the email
footer. That's much more friendly, informative and effective than just
RTFM. (As previously noted in this thread, it's often hard to know
which FMTR.)
Spencer
On 8/21/2010 6:08 PM, Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
On Sat, Aug 21,
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
>> Regarding length, the portion at the end of every r-help message (but
>> this does not appear at the end of r-devel messages or the messages
>> of other lists concerning R):
>>
>> "provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible
> Regarding length, the portion at the end of every r-help message (but
> this does not appear at the end of r-devel messages or the messages
> of other lists concerning R):
>
> "provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code."
>
> It was intended to provide a one line synopsis of
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
>>> previous suggestion by a regular contributor. I still think a better
>>> response is not to escalate: Either ignore the post or say something like,
>>> "I don't understand your que
Paul Johnson gmail.com> writes:
>
[snip: lots more snippage to try get gmane to let me post]
> What do you think of this: The priority is to put the most important
> thing at the top. The second priority is brevity.
I really like this.
Some suggestions:
=
> Posti
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Hadley Wickham wrote:
>> previous suggestion by a regular contributor. I still think a better
>> response is not to escalate: Either ignore the post or say something like,
>> "I don't understand your question. Please provide a self-contained minimal
>> example
> previous suggestion by a regular contributor. I still think a better
> response is not to escalate: Either ignore the post or say something like,
> "I don't understand your question. Please provide a self-contained minimal
> example as suggested in the Posting Guide ... ."
I agree wholehearte
I am reminded of a cartoon I saw recently in a urologists office that said:
"In this line of work, I see a lot of ass holes and pricks."
There is no shortage of people who are nasty, both among those who seek help
and those who are able to give it, in any community. I would say, though,
that inst
Hello,
RTFM is a succinct and useful answer in many cases, yet somewhat
impolite. A not much more verbose verbose version of it, possibly still
more useful, and quite polite would be something like:
"Please, read rule #NN at http://www.r-project.org/posting-guide.html";
(asuming that paragra
Hello, All:
I think there is a logic to Gabor's perspective, especially
regarding unintended consequences.
For example, if the as a result of changing policy, our most
creative and substantive contributors decide to reduce their level of
contribution and are not effectively re
Dear Gabor,
I do not agree with your claim
"In the case of the R list there is a
larger potential demand for free help than resources to answer and
without the usual monetary economics to allocate resources I believe
that the functional purpose of rudeness here is to ration those
resources and mi
On 08/20/10 01:08 AM, Spencer Graves wrote:
What do you think about adding a "No RTFM" policy to the R mailing
lists? Per, "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM":
The Ubuntu Forums and LinuxQuestions.org, for instance, have instituted
"no RTFM" policies to promote a welcoming atmosphere.[8][9].
R
...@gmail.com; spencer.gra...@structuremonitoring.com
Cc: r-devel@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [Rd] No RTFM?
Hello,
I have found the people associated with this list to be VERY helpful over
the years. This is especially appreciated as, some of my answers have come
from the same people who are busy
, the anti-thesis of a
commercial for profit software analogue.
Good Luck to you,
John
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:06:05 -0500
From: kw.s...@gmail.com
To: spencer.gra...@structuremonitoring.com
CC: r-devel@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [Rd] No RTFM?
Recently I was visiting with people about why
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Spencer Graves
wrote:
> Hi, Gabor, et al.:
>
>
> Can anyone comment on the experience of the Ubuntu Forums and
> LinuxQuestions.org, mentioned in the Wikipedia article I cited?
>
>
> Gabor makes an interesting point. However, logic without data is a
> v
Hi, Gabor, et al.:
Can anyone comment on the experience of the Ubuntu Forums and
LinuxQuestions.org, mentioned in the Wikipedia article I cited?
Gabor makes an interesting point. However, logic without data is
a very poor tool for decision making, because great sounding assump
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Spencer Graves
> wrote:
>> What do you think about adding a "No RTFM" policy to the R mailing lists?
>> Per, "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM":
>>
> I think this is a great suggestion.
>
> I notice the R ma
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Spencer Graves
wrote:
> What do you think about adding a "No RTFM" policy to the R mailing lists?
> Per, "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM":
>
I think this is a great suggestion.
I notice the R mailing list already has a gesture in this direction:
"Rudeness and
Recently I was visiting with people about why commercial support is needed
for some people using R. One person observed:
With commercial support, you have a person that you can call with questions
and yell at.
With R mailing lists, you can ask questions and have people yell at YOU.
The atmospher
What do you think about adding a "No RTFM" policy to the R mailing
lists? Per, "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM":
The Ubuntu Forums and LinuxQuestions.org, for instance, have instituted
"no RTFM" policies to promote a welcoming atmosphere.[8][9].
RTFM [and] "Go look on google" are two ina
33 matches
Mail list logo
