How to edit or delete a "signature" that is auto-added to one's post?

[Wendy Garrard]

Many years ago I created a signature (e.g., name & a quotation) that was automatically added to the end of each post. I haven't found this feature in profile/custom settings, or FAQ.

• Am I overlooking this?
• Perhaps it was omitted from this "newer" StataList format? It's been a few years since I participated in the List, but I seem to remember a re-vamp of this forum.

Nevertheless, I would like to delete/ (or revise) the one for my account

[William Lisowski]

From the upper-right corner of the page, click on your name and choose User Settings from the drop-down menu.

Click on the Account Tab.

Scroll down to Conversation Detail Options. Click on Edit Post Signature.

I will miss the words of wisdom from Tukey on your posts.

Actually, my recollection from when I experimented with a signature is that it is applied at the time the post is displayed, not at the time it is created. So if you eliminate or change your signature, I think the revision applies to the display of all past as well as future posts. Anyhow, the belief in that is why I do not put my Stata version into my signature.

[Wendy Garrard]

Thanks very much William. Your direction was spot on! Also you are correct that a signature does not appear in a post preview, thus no flexibility to revise on-the-fly. I apologize for overlooking that layer of settings. And, I decided not to delete, but substituted a more concise phrase.

I appreciate your nod to the Tukey quote, Alas, one rarely sees reference to our quant pioneers these days.

[Nick Cox]

"Dare to use your intelligence" would be my translation of sapere aude. Using this often signals indirectly that you've studied somewhere which had the injunction as its motto.

[Marcos Almeida]

Just a little digression from stats. Using a sentence as a signature can be interesting sometimes. More so when we do feel linked to the specific quote and we do know its whereabouts. It also helps to be aware of the change of use concerning the adopted motto throughout the times, as already pointed out by William and Nick. With regards to the origins, ‘sapere aude’ comes arguably from Horace, a Roman poet who lived more than 20 centuries ago. Then, he just wished to invite ‘thumblers’ to finish the reading of his ‘thoughtful’ book of letters.

[William Lisowski]

A little housekeeping here.

For those who read this topic at a later date and wonder why the signature appears unchanged between post #1 and post #3, it's because the signature is taken from the author's profile at the time the statalist.org software serves the page to your web browser. So the new signature created between post #1 and post #3 will henceforth be seen on all posts past and future from the author. The same thing is true for the avatar, also.

The original signature whose passing I mourn was (thanks to the Internet Archive at archive.org)

/*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Far better an approximate answer to the right question,
. . . than the exact answer to the wrong question . . .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John Tukey ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*/

which means, to me, that reformulating your model so you can claim consistency for your parameter estimates is not necessarily an improvement over inconsistent estimates for a correctly formulated model.

And, a final thought, perhaps Statalist should adopt sapere aude as the colophon for the FAQ. It works there with either Nick's interpretation or Marcos's.

[Wendy Garrard]

How fun! Thanks so much for the friendly banter about sapere aude, and also Tukey. It reminds me of grad school days in Chicago where (especially after a 3-hr quant class) we often enjoyed cheap pizza and pitchers while casually pondering phil. of sci. At times we'd seriously overload our grad-level intellects, and need to adjourn to the late (free) show at 2nd City or see Rocky Horror to claw back our humanity

Nick -- I agree that your interpretation is correct. I think the literal meaning in Latin is "dare to know". But I learned it, loosely translated, as "dare to think for yourself" ... and no, to my knowledge, i've never been affiliated with an institution having this motto

Marcos -- I think my first awareness of sapere aude was via cursory study of Kant. But a quick Wiki-look confirms it originated with Horace (1st century), was extensively used (dare I say popularized?) during the Enlightenment by Kant (17-18th century ?), and associated with Foucault's (20th century) work, of which I've read little.

William -- there are many variations of this famous Tukey quote, but to my knowledge I used the most accurate, if not his original. it seems this was a favorite saying of his, so there are many alternatives out there. My fav shorthand version is "Be approximately right rather than exactly wrong". My own take-away lesson is, strive to be substantively accurate, and quantitatively credible. (btw, I'm an applied social psych)

Lewin, Popper, and Tukey are my go-to squad for scholarly quotes. For those not familiar, trust me, these guys are probably cooler than you think . E.g.,

• Lewin -- When we are young we are like a river flowing—and then we freeze.
• Popper -- 1) Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again, and 2) If you can't say it simply and clearly, keep quiet, and keep working on it till you can.
• Tukey -- 1) The best thing about being a statistician is that you get to play in everyone's backyard, and 2) apropos intentional analytic foobars: Don't do that crap if you want to be my friend..

I think adopting a motto for StataList is an excellent idea! ... Perhaps we could have open nominations (with submissions being accompanied by a bit of background) ?

Finally, I apologize for encouraging this thread away from Stata specifically ... BUT:

• THANK YOU gentlemen, you've made my day! Never, these days, am I lucky enough to have such a discussion.
• Also, I'd be embarrassed if I gave y'all the impression my interests are limited to methodology and phil of sci. As proof, note my avatar = the character "Wendy" of Southpark.

[Nick Cox]

The canonical source for your Tukey quotation is his 1962 paper on "The future of data analysis" in Annals of Mathematical Statistics.

I am surprised at the other quotation you attribute to Tukey.

The motto for Statalist would have to be

Please do read the FAQ Advice before you post.

[Wendy Garrard]

Thanks for the correction Nick, Memory failed me, Apologies about the misquote. the full John Tukey quote is:

• Far better an approximate answer to the right question, which is often vague, than an exact answer to the wrong question, which can always be made precise. (1962, p 13)

[William Lisowski]

Thanks to Nick for the attribution and to Wendy for providing the exact quote.

Regarding the second quote, I was going to write that from conversations with Bell Labs statisticians in the early 1980's, the quote sounds plausible. A little work with DuckDuckGo found it, but lacking attribution to a specific publication. Still, I find it consistent with other anecdotes, in particular in the context of his work with Bell Labs, which seems a logical setting for this quote.

Visualization is often used for evil - twisting insignificant data changes and making them look meaningful. Don't do that crap if you want to be my friend. Present results clearly and honestly. If something isn't working - those reviewing results need to know.

Although post #7 suggests otherwise, my understanding from a relatively recent graduate is that U. Chicago's motto is "where fun goes to die". I envy those who thought about philosophy of science over beers as an undergrad. I wish that as an undergrad I had better understood the foundations of statistics in philosophy.

One last Tukey quote, often apposite to Statalist questions.

The combination of some data and an aching desire for an answer does not ensure that a reasonable answer can be extracted from a given body of data.

[Nick Cox]

"The Ultimate Quotable Einstein" https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10176.html has a long section of quotations attributed to Einstein which cannot be given a precise source. I fear that a Tukey quotation book would have such a section too.

Don't do that crap if you want to be my friend

doesn't to me look like anything Tukey would have written, but I will yield as graciously and gracefully as I can to refutation with an exact reference.

[William Lisowski]

Oh, I don't for a moment believe Tukey would have written that for publication - at least, not for publication external to Bell Labs. I think it's more likely sourced from someone who heard it, likely from a seminar or project review meeting, perhaps published as a recollection in their reminisces. Again, it fits plausibly with Tukey anecdotes I heard from others at Bell Labs: by all reports he was a larger-than-life figure. That's the most credit I can assign it.

[Wendy Garrard]

Thanks to all who noted my clumsy use of the Tukey quotation in question

I agree completely that it's unlikely Tukey said that in a publication or professional talk. As a student I was assigned to write (w references) brief essays on the lives, contributions, and controversies (e.g., Popper and the Wittgenstein's poker incident, in Shilip's [ed.] 1974 "The Philosophy of Karl Popper") of a few prominent phil of sci figures. The goal being to engage us meaningfully w the people as well as their work. Those essays helped me to fall in love with the philosophy of science, especially the work of Sir Karl Popper, and it's influence on (all?) research methodology in quantitative and social psychology. Since then I've collected bios of and notes on the work of my my intellectual heroes. Unfortunately, not always noting sources.
.
I read the quote in question in a written 3rd-party's account of an exchange between Tukey and a colleague. Unfortunately, I no longer have the citation for that source. However, as a novice researcher that quote was a profound insight. John Tukey in real life must be (was) a man of integrity and standards to take such a personal stand against a person over a serious misrepresentation of data and/or analysis (analytic foobar was the euphemism I used in the initial post on this quote).

I will try to think of a possible source. And apologies for my own (unintended) misrepresentation of the quote being directly from Tukey, as opposed attributed to him.

BTW - My Master's level edu was at Loyola University Chicago, a Jesuit univ, where the motto is, I believe, "Ad majoreum dei gloriam." I understand the program I attended (Applied Soc Psy) still exists and Scott Tindale remains Director of psych grad studies. However, I understand the emphasis may have shifted and many of my profs are no longer there. I feel fortunate for my exposure to "old-school" fundamentals of research methods at a time when many programs were increasingly focused on teaching specific research design and stat procedures.