Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    My first question to Statalist was something like "Why can't I run a program I haven't installed?" So I try to be tolerant. I mostly get annoyed when advice is given and repeatedly ignored.

    Maybe my biggest pet peeve is when people don't use code tags. I don't really get mad about it, but I will tell them to use them in the future. Clyde S. is far more willing to wade through garbled output than I am.
    -------------------------------------------
    Richard Williams, Notre Dame Dept of Sociology
    Stata Version: 17.0 MP (2 processor)

    EMAIL: [email protected]
    WWW: https://www3.nd.edu/~rwilliam

    Comment


    • #17
      Oh, and it is instructive to do a keyword search for "stupid" in this forum!
      Doug Hemken
      SSCC, Univ. of Wisc.-Madison

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Doug Hemken View Post
        Oh, and it is instructive to do a keyword search for "stupid" in this forum!
        Just quickly skimming, most of the uses of the word "stupid" seem be from people calling themselves stupid or apologizing for asking what they fear may be a stupid question. I don't recall ever seeing one person calling another person stupid, but I suppose it may have happened.
        -------------------------------------------
        Richard Williams, Notre Dame Dept of Sociology
        Stata Version: 17.0 MP (2 processor)

        EMAIL: [email protected]
        WWW: https://www3.nd.edu/~rwilliam

        Comment


        • #19
          This twitter text was really puzzling me. I used to access the Statalist for a couple of years, and since April 2014, one month after its beginning, I've been accessing (several times a day!) the Stata Forum. Although I cannot affirm that I read 100% of the posts, I do affirm to have never witnessed something similar to the "portrait" described in the twitter message.

          So far so good. It was great that Claire came to this Forum, and I'm sure she will confirm that bad behaviour is something very difficult to be found here, if ever.

          Sometimes, it is just a question of interpretation, since some of us are not fully skilled in English. For example, "take care", for non-native speakers, may be understood as a cold warning, instead of a friendly message.

          There are also some posts that don't get a fast reply, and their authors may start to feel upset about that, sometimes sending a new message with not so friendly terms. Then, some of us try to kindly explain what really happened, I mean, the (probable) reasons for the lack of a reply.

          To end, I must say that this twitter, puzzling for us (frequent members, on account of contrasting with the reality of this forum), well, it sparked several messages of "mea culpa".

          Oddly enough, these are the guys, exactly, I repeatly, exactly, who have spent tons of stamina, time, effort, patience and goodwill to help Stata-users from all over the world.

          When I started to access this Forum, I took them as beacons to me. And they still are like this henceforth.

          If we just observe the number (and quality) of messages written by such a "dream team" of members, it is arguably easy to realize how devoted they are. Words fail me to describe how much indebted I am to them.

          This is to say that Claire's apology, warm and kind as it was, clarified the issue. I am very happy with that. I'm also relieved to have understood the whereabouts of the creation of text and, more so, to have confirmed by so many people, including Claire, that it did not convey the reality of this Forum.
          Last edited by Marcos Almeida; 25 May 2018, 06:05.
          Best regards,

          Marcos

          Comment


          • #20
            In his well written reply, Marcos is right in stating that sometimes it's a matter of language for those, like me, that are not English mother tongue..
            I find that contributing to Statalist is rewarding even in this respect.
            From this interesting thread I've learnt that "the straw that breaks the camel's back" means the umpteenth problem that makes an already difficult situation even more difficult to manage.
            There's an Italian saying with the same meaning that goes: "This is the the drop that makes the vase overflow".
            Kind regards,
            Carlo
            (Stata 18.0 SE)

            Comment


            • #21
              For example, "take care", for non-native speakers, may be understood as a cold warning, instead of a friendly message.
              I say "take care" all the time. No wonder the foreign students look terrified when they see me!

              I remember the first time I heard "the straw that broke the camel's back." I thought the teacher would be quite impressed when I said it probably had something to do with hurricanes hurtling things at superspeed. But she wasn't.

              We had a German foreign exchange student 10+ years ago. Excellent English. But she was often a little baffled and bewildered by American phrases and humor. Good to keep in mind how words can easily be misinterpreted, especially in cross-cultural settings.
              Last edited by Richard Williams; 25 May 2018, 13:31.
              -------------------------------------------
              Richard Williams, Notre Dame Dept of Sociology
              Stata Version: 17.0 MP (2 processor)

              EMAIL: [email protected]
              WWW: https://www3.nd.edu/~rwilliam

              Comment


              • #22
                As someone who likes the Statalist and the Stata community a lot, but is maybe more of an outsider, I'll add my 2 cents.

                First, I think that Clair's experience with Cross-Validated is not atypical. Of all the StackExchange communities I've interacted with, Cross Validated has generally been the most snarky. I'm not entirely sure why that is. I generally find the Statalist to be a lot more sympathetic and generically helpful.

                I do think that a fair number of questions here do get responded to with a link to the FAQ in what amounts to a slight eye roll. That's not to say they don't sort of deserve an eye-roll, I'm generally a believer in forum etiquette, but it does happen a lot and I suspect it's not always people being carelessly obsequious. It's not always clear from the FAQ exactly how to structure a good question when you're not already semi-proficient in the coding language. I think this is a problem in a lot of support forums more generally, but I suspect Stata is a bit more exposed to the problem because there's a huge gulf between people who write extensive code in the language and people who interact with it more superficially from the interactive window or the drop-downs. I started using Stata in 2006, but until I got fairly proficient in writing full-on code a few years later, I rightly or wrongly felt sort of boxed out of the Statalist.

                It might be nice if the FAQ had couple of explicit examples of what constitutes a good question and what elements in the example make it a good question, along with a hold-your-hand explanation of how the hypothetical poster would have used dataex to sample the data, blocked off the code, summarized the nature of the test, etc. An example of a bad question would be instructive as well. I could imagine this being done in the Sandbox or something and then linked to off of the FAQ or the post window.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re Malcom's final paragraph in #22, I nominate Chuck Huber (StataCorp) to record a short video showing how to use -dataex- (including installation for those with older versions of Stata), how to use code tags in Statalist, etc. (If such a video already exists, I have not found it.)

                  --
                  Bruce Weaver
                  Email: [email protected]
                  Web: http://sites.google.com/a/lakeheadu.ca/bweaver/
                  Version: Stata/MP 18.0 (Windows)

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Excellent suggestions by Malcom #22 and Bruce #23.
                    Roman

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Malcolm's comments add some interesting different perspectives, although I don't follow them all. I don't follow who is being obsequious, and why it would/might/does lead to snarkiness or appearances of being unfriendly.

                      Out of curiosity I looked for his experiences on Cross Validated, but couldn't see any identifiable to him. CV has a vast range from people posting their homework to challenging frontier or technical stuff. People who want to help out by answering questions, including simpler ones, are always welcome.

                      Examples for the FAQ: It seems to follow from Malcolm's remarks that someone betwixt and between the outright beginners and the more experienced should write them. I find it hard to imagine something that isn't either artificial or patronising. The most frequent problem is that not that people wouldn't write excellent questions if they could; it is with those who apparently don't even bother to read the FAQ at all. I can sense that it's too long to be widely attractive reading, but there is a reason for everything.

                      But let me bounce this back as a challenge to the community: make suggestions of good examples as material for, or as a supplement to, the FAQ, and let there be a discussion of their merits.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I fully agree with Nick. Several posts from the new members show clearly that some ones neither read the FAQ nor took a look at previous posts.

                        Asking them politely to do so only improves the quality of the posts. After all, there is not much to do - in terms of an insightful reply - with an uninformative post.

                        As a suggestion, maybe there could be an item to click ‘yes’ before finishing the registration: ‘I inform to have read the FAQ’.
                        Best regards,

                        Marcos

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Two haphazard selections from Twitter today:

                          1. JORDANOfCA

                          There is a significant positive relationship between the snarky responses on the @Stata forum and my annoyance level.
                          2. inandoutofcars

                          i dont like stata even at the best of times (not free, clunky, annoying, less intuitive than r, online forums and help are useless with rude academics while r online documentation is flawless and helpful) and the adelaide stata econometrics classes are a disaster
                          A quick sampling of the latter's tweets indicates that he uses more rude words on Twitter in a day than you will find in a decade on Statalist.

                          Everyone has to have rules for what they don't do, although you discover them rather than invent them. I won't go on Twitter to argue with these people, or even ask them to give examples and explain what they mean.

                          But some people here do post on Twitter too, so they may be more in tune with discussions there.

                          But here is an invitation, which may diffuse. Anyone who doesn't like Statalist is more than welcome to join and give better, quicker, nicer answers than we have at present. If the level is as bad as they imply, they can help out easily.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I am always curious at the world. Here is another fresh perspective from outside our narrow confines from one Andrew Baker, who appears to be a graduate student at Stanford, a fine university, and from his tweets some kind of expert on good manners:

                            I love how everyone helps in with R problems (because we'll all use it later), whereas stata you gotta go to a forum and get barked at by OGs.
                            https://twitter.com/Andrew___Baker/s...39586291437568

                            Just in case you thought life was perhaps a little grey and complicated and variable, it's good to be reminded of simple black-and-white contrasts.

                            PS. I had to Google OG. It's presumably part of the definition of being an OG that you have to Google it. At least I can Google.

                            PPS Where do R people go for help so that we can see how nice they (you in some cases) are? Still curious.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I just replied to the tweet mentioned in #28.
                              I contribute to StataList (and may even be an OG). Might you provide a few examples of such barking? It could be valuable to make people aware of perhaps-inappropriate behaviors. I will share their essence with StataList if reasonable people would consider them to be barking.
                              I will share with this thread if a reasonable response is forthcoming.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                As a Stata learner often appearing on the "Most users ever online" list, I can attest to the fact that people that post on this forum are very fine people and very professional people who have understood that knowledge ( including Stata skills ) is a public good. I only pray that this forum continues to serve future generations. Thank you once again for spending your time answering our questions- including basic ones such as the one I once asked on duration analysis and got an immediate reply that saved me a whole morning of online search. Bu the way, I am going back to check if there are new posts that might address my huge Stata knowledge gaps.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X