Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
On 26/01/2016 6:30 AM, S Ellison wrote: Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: Slightly surprised that in a debate postulated on increasing 'meanness', no-one has yet pointed to Trey Causey's analysis of R-help's alleged meanness at http://badhessian.org/2013/04/has-r-help-gotten-meaner-over-time-and-what-does-mancur-olson-have-to-say-about-it/ Up to 2013, it was apparently getting _less_ 'mean', not more. I don't remember reading that article when it first appeared. It's interesting, and mostly well done. I'd only argue about one conclusion: He attributes the increase of his category 2 (not a response) to dominance near the end of the period as due to a lot of questions going unanswered, but gives no apparent evidence for that. I think anyone who has participated in this group for a long time would recognize that very few questions go unanswered; only the ones that are so badly posed that nobody can figure out what to say. What is far more common is that discussion on threads goes off on a tangent that has nothing to do with questions or answers. There are also threads like this one that contain no questions or answers, and are just full of hot air. Thanks for posting the link. Duncan Murdoch __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
> Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there
> are
> many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently range
> from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile:
Slightly surprised that in a debate postulated on increasing 'meanness', no-one
has yet pointed to Trey Causey's analysis of R-help's alleged meanness at
http://badhessian.org/2013/04/has-r-help-gotten-meaner-over-time-and-what-does-mancur-olson-have-to-say-about-it/
Up to 2013, it was apparently getting _less_ 'mean', not more.
S Ellison
***
This email and any attachments are confidential. Any use...{{dropped:8}}
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
On 01/25/2016 11:06 AM, Oliver Keyes wrote: +1. And frankly I would like to suggest that there is another obvious solution here; pairing a set of guidelines around expected user behaviour with removing people from the mailing list, or moderating them, if they do not think that creating a non-toxic environment is good. These guidelines DO exist. It is called the posting guide. Unfortunately, it is clear that some people cannot be bothered to read that. Is that an excuse to be mistreated? By no means. If you, or anyone else has a good way to encourage new users to read and use the guidelines, I think we would love to hear it. On 25 January 2016 at 07:23, Fowler, Mark wrote: I'm glad to see the issue of negative feedback addressed. I can especially relate to the 'cringe' feeling when reading some authoritarian backhand to a new user. We do see a number of obviously inappropriate or overly lazy postings, but I encounter far more postings where I don't feel competent to judge their merit. It might be better to simply disregard a posting one does not like for some reason. It might also be worthwhile to actively counter negative feedback when we experience that 'cringing' moment. I'm not thinking to foster contention, but simply to provide some tangible reassurance to new users, and not just the ones invoking the negative feedback, that a particular respondent may not represent the perspective of the list. -Original Message- From: R-help [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Michael Friendly Sent: January 24, 2016 5:43 PM To: Jean-Luc Dupouey; r-help@r-project.org Subject: Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help? On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote: Dear members, Not a technical question: But one worth raising... The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project. [snip ...] I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, In addition to the other replies, there is another trend I've seen that has actively worked to suppress discussion on R-help and move it elsewhere. The general things: - R-help was too unwieldy and so it was a good idea to hive-off specialized topics to various sub lists, R-SIG-Mac, R-SIG-Geo, etc. - Many people posted badly-formed questions to R-help, and so it was a good idea to develop and refer to the posting guide to mitigate the number of purely junk postings. Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: - Is this homework? We don't do homework (sometimes false alarms, where the OP has to reply to say it is not) - Didn't you bother to do your homework, RTFM, or Google? - This is off-topic because XXX (e.g., it is not strictly an R programming question). - You asked about doing XXX, but this is a stupid thing to want to do. - Don't ask here; you need to talk to a statistical consultant. I find this sad in a public mailing list sent to all R-help subscribers and I sometimes cringe when I read replies to people who were actually trying to get help with some R-related problem, but expressed it badly, didn't know exactly what to ask for, or how to format it, or somehow motivated a frequent-replier to publicly dis the OP. On the other hand, I still see a spirit of great generosity among some people who frequently reply to R-help, taking a possibly badly posed or ill-formatted question, and going to some lengths to provide a a helpful answer of some sort. I applaud those who take the time and effort to do this. I use R in a number of my courses, and used to advise students to post to R-help for general programming questions (not just homework) they couldn't solve. I don't do this any more, because several of them reported a negative experience. In contrast, in the Stackexchange model, there are numerous sublists cross-classified by their tags. If I have a specific knitr, ggplot2, LaTeX, or statistical modeling question, I'm now more likely to post it there, and the worst that can happen is that no one "upvotes" it or someone (helpfully) marks it as a duplicate of a similar question. But comments there are not propagated to all subscribers, and those who reply helpfully, can see their solutions accepted or not, or commented on in that specific topic. Perhaps one solution would be to create a new "R-not-help" list where, as in a Monty Python skit, people could be directed there to be insulted and all these unhelpful replies could be sent. A milder alternative
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
I submit it is up to list members to maintain civility. If we politely point out. off-line, to people who post questionable posts what they are doing, I am sure their behavior will quickly change.John John David Sorkin M.D., Ph.D. Professor of Medicine Chief, Biostatistics and Informatics University of Maryland School of Medicine Division of Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine Baltimore VA Medical Center 10 North Greene Street GRECC (BT/18/GR) Baltimore, MD 21201-1524 (Phone) 410-605-7119 (Fax) 410-605-7913 (Please call phone number above prior to faxing) >>> Peter Alspach 01/25/16 5:33 PM >>> I think this would be re-defining the role of the moderators for list, which is essentially to filter out spam. Only new members are subject to this moderation, and if a message is genuine then their moderator flag is cleared (i.e., they are no longer subject to moderation). Thus the list isn't moderated in the 'usual' sense. That said, I have occasionally asked a new poster to reword their question (or simply add a subject line) and explained that this helps ensure they get a good answer, and not a rude one. Mostly people seem to appreciate that. Peter Alspach (one of the 'moderators') -Original Message- From: R-help [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Oliver Keyes Sent: Tuesday, 26 January 2016 10:23 a.m. To: Duncan Murdoch Cc: r-help Subject: Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help? Sorry, poor phrasing on my part; on the occasions where someone is rude, all I see is... I agree the public cautioning should be done by moderators, yes. On 25 January 2016 at 16:13, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > On 25/01/2016 3:33 PM, Hasan Diwan wrote: >> >> There exists a fine line between being unintentionally rude, but >> helpful and purposely putting someone down. -- H > > > I'm afraid I don't think your point is relevant. I didn't claim all > the people who were rude did it unintentionally. However, I don't > know anyone on the list who is always rude and never helpful. Oliver > claimed almost everyone is like that. > > I actually agree with a weaker version of John's proposal (which I cut > out of my reply to Oliver). I can imagine a public reprimand from one > of the moderators would be appropriate. It would never be appropriate > from general list members; that's what leads to flame wars. > > I'm not a moderator, so I would not publicly "remind the poster to > reply in a more moderate tone", and neither should you (unless you're a > moderator). > It would be much better if one or both of us posted a more helpful > response when we saw a rude, unhelpful one. > > Duncan Murdoch > > >> >> On 25 January 2016 at 12:07, Duncan Murdoch >> >> wrote: >> >> > On 25/01/2016 2:45 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote: >> > >> >> I disagree, and would argue that fails to take a systemic view of >> >> this kind of behaviour. >> >> >> >> If individual commentators are acerbic and are only privately >> >> reprimanded, from the perspective of everyone else it looks like >> >> the acerbic reply was A-OK. Someone said something unnecessarily >> >> hostile and the response was...nada. That creates an environment >> >> where there are no clear examples of what crosses a line and no >> >> clear expectation that moderation is even a thing that happens. >> >> Indeed, I was shocked to discover this list _was_ moderated >> >> precisely because all I see is people being mean and nothing much else >> >> happening. >> >> >> > >> > Why would you bother to read it if that's all you see? I think >> > there are examples of posts here which are not at all helpful, and >> > others which are rude, but the majority are actually helpful (even >> > some of the rude ones). >> > >> > Duncan Murdoch >> > >> > >> > __ >> > R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see >> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help >> > PLEASE do read the posting guide >> > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html >> > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. >> > >> >> >> > > __ > R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > and provide commented, minimal, self-conta
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
I think this would be re-defining the role of the moderators for list, which is
essentially to filter out spam. Only new members are subject to this
moderation, and if a message is genuine then their moderator flag is cleared
(i.e., they are no longer subject to moderation). Thus the list isn't
moderated in the 'usual' sense.
That said, I have occasionally asked a new poster to reword their question (or
simply add a subject line) and explained that this helps ensure they get a good
answer, and not a rude one. Mostly people seem to appreciate that.
Peter Alspach
(one of the 'moderators')
-Original Message-
From: R-help [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Oliver Keyes
Sent: Tuesday, 26 January 2016 10:23 a.m.
To: Duncan Murdoch
Cc: r-help
Subject: Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
Sorry, poor phrasing on my part; on the occasions where someone is rude, all I
see is...
I agree the public cautioning should be done by moderators, yes.
On 25 January 2016 at 16:13, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
> On 25/01/2016 3:33 PM, Hasan Diwan wrote:
>>
>> There exists a fine line between being unintentionally rude, but
>> helpful and purposely putting someone down. -- H
>
>
> I'm afraid I don't think your point is relevant. I didn't claim all
> the people who were rude did it unintentionally. However, I don't
> know anyone on the list who is always rude and never helpful. Oliver
> claimed almost everyone is like that.
>
> I actually agree with a weaker version of John's proposal (which I cut
> out of my reply to Oliver). I can imagine a public reprimand from one
> of the moderators would be appropriate. It would never be appropriate
> from general list members; that's what leads to flame wars.
>
> I'm not a moderator, so I would not publicly "remind the poster to
> reply in a more moderate tone", and neither should you (unless you're a
> moderator).
> It would be much better if one or both of us posted a more helpful
> response when we saw a rude, unhelpful one.
>
> Duncan Murdoch
>
>
>>
>> On 25 January 2016 at 12:07, Duncan Murdoch
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On 25/01/2016 2:45 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote:
>> >
>> >> I disagree, and would argue that fails to take a systemic view of
>> >> this kind of behaviour.
>> >>
>> >> If individual commentators are acerbic and are only privately
>> >> reprimanded, from the perspective of everyone else it looks like
>> >> the acerbic reply was A-OK. Someone said something unnecessarily
>> >> hostile and the response was...nada. That creates an environment
>> >> where there are no clear examples of what crosses a line and no
>> >> clear expectation that moderation is even a thing that happens.
>> >> Indeed, I was shocked to discover this list _was_ moderated
>> >> precisely because all I see is people being mean and nothing much else
>> >> happening.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Why would you bother to read it if that's all you see? I think
>> > there are examples of posts here which are not at all helpful, and
>> > others which are rude, but the majority are actually helpful (even
>> > some of the rude ones).
>> >
>> > Duncan Murdoch
>> >
>> >
>> > __
>> > R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
>> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
>> > PLEASE do read the posting guide
>> > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
>> > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
> __
> R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide
> http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
--
Oliver Keyes
Count Logula
Wikimedia Foundation
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
The contents of this e-mail are confidential and may be ...{{dropped:14}}
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:06:35 -0500 Oliver Keyes wrote: > +1. And frankly I would like to suggest that there is another obvious > solution here; pairing a set of guidelines around expected user > behaviour with removing people from the mailing list, or moderating > them, if they do not think that creating a non-toxic environment is > good. > The problem is defining a "toxic environment." One person can find all kinds of offense and rudness in something where another would be appreciating a short, concise response, such as a suggestion to "read the manual." "Toxic" is personal and one can find it wherever one looks, if so minded. I suspect that if one perceives rudeness, one ought to check and see that we haven't left our sensibilities out in the traffic pattern where they are bound to be trampled. __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:33:12 -0800 Hasan Diwan wrote: > There exists a fine line between being unintentionally rude, but > helpful and purposely putting someone down. -- H The line is really not "fine" at all since it lies in that word "purposely." Also, you've associated "helpful" with unintentional rudeness. The distinction you've drawn is clear. JWDougherty __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
Sorry, poor phrasing on my part; on the occasions where someone is rude, all I see is... I agree the public cautioning should be done by moderators, yes. On 25 January 2016 at 16:13, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > On 25/01/2016 3:33 PM, Hasan Diwan wrote: >> >> There exists a fine line between being unintentionally rude, but helpful >> and purposely putting someone down. -- H > > > I'm afraid I don't think your point is relevant. I didn't claim all the > people who were rude did it unintentionally. However, I don't know anyone > on the list who is always rude and never helpful. Oliver claimed almost > everyone is like that. > > I actually agree with a weaker version of John's proposal (which I cut out > of my reply to Oliver). I can imagine a public reprimand from one of the > moderators would be appropriate. It would never be appropriate from general > list members; that's what leads to flame wars. > > I'm not a moderator, so I would not publicly "remind the poster to reply in > a more moderate tone", and neither should you (unless you're a moderator). > It would be much better if one or both of us posted a more helpful response > when we saw a rude, unhelpful one. > > Duncan Murdoch > > >> >> On 25 January 2016 at 12:07, Duncan Murdoch >> wrote: >> >> > On 25/01/2016 2:45 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote: >> > >> >> I disagree, and would argue that fails to take a systemic view of this >> >> kind of behaviour. >> >> >> >> If individual commentators are acerbic and are only privately >> >> reprimanded, from the perspective of everyone else it looks like the >> >> acerbic reply was A-OK. Someone said something unnecessarily hostile >> >> and the response was...nada. That creates an environment where there >> >> are no clear examples of what crosses a line and no clear expectation >> >> that moderation is even a thing that happens. Indeed, I was shocked to >> >> discover this list _was_ moderated precisely because all I see is >> >> people being mean and nothing much else happening. >> >> >> > >> > Why would you bother to read it if that's all you see? I think there >> > are >> > examples of posts here which are not at all helpful, and others which >> > are >> > rude, but the majority are actually helpful (even some of the rude >> > ones). >> > >> > Duncan Murdoch >> > >> > >> > __ >> > R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see >> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help >> > PLEASE do read the posting guide >> > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html >> > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. >> > >> >> >> > > __ > R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. -- Oliver Keyes Count Logula Wikimedia Foundation __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
On 25 January 2016 at 13:13, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > On 25/01/2016 3:33 PM, Hasan Diwan wrote: > >> There exists a fine line between being unintentionally rude, but helpful >> and purposely putting someone down. -- H >> > > I'm afraid I don't think your point is relevant. I didn't claim all the > people who were rude did it unintentionally. However, I don't know anyone > on the list who is always rude and never helpful. Oliver claimed almost > everyone is like that. > I actually agree with a weaker version of John's proposal (which I cut out > of my reply to Oliver). I can imagine a public reprimand from one of the > moderators would be appropriate. It would never be appropriate from > general list members; that's what leads to flame wars. > > I'm not a moderator, so I would not publicly "remind the poster to reply > in a more moderate tone", and neither should you (unless you're a > moderator). It would be much better if one or both of us posted a more > helpful response when we saw a rude, unhelpful one. I'm not one to attack others in general, and have developed thick skin, so a lot of what others find rude, I will ignore and get on with things. That said, if someone does tell me that e.g. "Hasan is being offensive because of $x, $y or $z", I'll apologise and get on with my life. Most of the time, when people find me offensive, it's because I treat others how I wish to be treated and the rhetoric just doesn't offend me. -- H > > > Duncan Murdoch > > > > >> On 25 January 2016 at 12:07, Duncan Murdoch >> wrote: >> >> > On 25/01/2016 2:45 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote: >> > >> >> I disagree, and would argue that fails to take a systemic view of this >> >> kind of behaviour. >> >> >> >> If individual commentators are acerbic and are only privately >> >> reprimanded, from the perspective of everyone else it looks like the >> >> acerbic reply was A-OK. Someone said something unnecessarily hostile >> >> and the response was...nada. That creates an environment where there >> >> are no clear examples of what crosses a line and no clear expectation >> >> that moderation is even a thing that happens. Indeed, I was shocked to >> >> discover this list _was_ moderated precisely because all I see is >> >> people being mean and nothing much else happening. >> >> >> > >> > Why would you bother to read it if that's all you see? I think there >> are >> > examples of posts here which are not at all helpful, and others which >> are >> > rude, but the majority are actually helpful (even some of the rude >> ones). >> > >> > Duncan Murdoch >> > >> > >> > __ >> > R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see >> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help >> > PLEASE do read the posting guide >> > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html >> > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. >> > >> >> >> >> > -- OpenPGP: https://hasan.d8u.us/gpg.key Sent from my mobile device Envoyé de mon portable [[alternative HTML version deleted]] __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
On 25/01/2016 3:33 PM, Hasan Diwan wrote: There exists a fine line between being unintentionally rude, but helpful and purposely putting someone down. -- H I'm afraid I don't think your point is relevant. I didn't claim all the people who were rude did it unintentionally. However, I don't know anyone on the list who is always rude and never helpful. Oliver claimed almost everyone is like that. I actually agree with a weaker version of John's proposal (which I cut out of my reply to Oliver). I can imagine a public reprimand from one of the moderators would be appropriate. It would never be appropriate from general list members; that's what leads to flame wars. I'm not a moderator, so I would not publicly "remind the poster to reply in a more moderate tone", and neither should you (unless you're a moderator). It would be much better if one or both of us posted a more helpful response when we saw a rude, unhelpful one. Duncan Murdoch On 25 January 2016 at 12:07, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > On 25/01/2016 2:45 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote: > >> I disagree, and would argue that fails to take a systemic view of this >> kind of behaviour. >> >> If individual commentators are acerbic and are only privately >> reprimanded, from the perspective of everyone else it looks like the >> acerbic reply was A-OK. Someone said something unnecessarily hostile >> and the response was...nada. That creates an environment where there >> are no clear examples of what crosses a line and no clear expectation >> that moderation is even a thing that happens. Indeed, I was shocked to >> discover this list _was_ moderated precisely because all I see is >> people being mean and nothing much else happening. >> > > Why would you bother to read it if that's all you see? I think there are > examples of posts here which are not at all helpful, and others which are > rude, but the majority are actually helpful (even some of the rude ones). > > Duncan Murdoch > > > __ > R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. > __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
There exists a fine line between being unintentionally rude, but helpful and purposely putting someone down. -- H On 25 January 2016 at 12:07, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > On 25/01/2016 2:45 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote: > >> I disagree, and would argue that fails to take a systemic view of this >> kind of behaviour. >> >> If individual commentators are acerbic and are only privately >> reprimanded, from the perspective of everyone else it looks like the >> acerbic reply was A-OK. Someone said something unnecessarily hostile >> and the response was...nada. That creates an environment where there >> are no clear examples of what crosses a line and no clear expectation >> that moderation is even a thing that happens. Indeed, I was shocked to >> discover this list _was_ moderated precisely because all I see is >> people being mean and nothing much else happening. >> > > Why would you bother to read it if that's all you see? I think there are > examples of posts here which are not at all helpful, and others which are > rude, but the majority are actually helpful (even some of the rude ones). > > Duncan Murdoch > > > __ > R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. > -- OpenPGP: https://hasan.d8u.us/gpg.key Sent from my mobile device Envoyé de mon portable [[alternative HTML version deleted]] __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
On 25/01/2016 2:45 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote: I disagree, and would argue that fails to take a systemic view of this kind of behaviour. If individual commentators are acerbic and are only privately reprimanded, from the perspective of everyone else it looks like the acerbic reply was A-OK. Someone said something unnecessarily hostile and the response was...nada. That creates an environment where there are no clear examples of what crosses a line and no clear expectation that moderation is even a thing that happens. Indeed, I was shocked to discover this list _was_ moderated precisely because all I see is people being mean and nothing much else happening. Why would you bother to read it if that's all you see? I think there are examples of posts here which are not at all helpful, and others which are rude, but the majority are actually helpful (even some of the rude ones). Duncan Murdoch __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
I disagree, and would argue that fails to take a systemic view of this kind of behaviour. If individual commentators are acerbic and are only privately reprimanded, from the perspective of everyone else it looks like the acerbic reply was A-OK. Someone said something unnecessarily hostile and the response was...nada. That creates an environment where there are no clear examples of what crosses a line and no clear expectation that moderation is even a thing that happens. Indeed, I was shocked to discover this list _was_ moderated precisely because all I see is people being mean and nothing much else happening. I would much rather a system where there is some sort of public notice. It doesn't have to be identifying. Just "after a couple of replies that did not follow our guidelines I have put some members of this list on moderation, meaning that they must have their posts cleared before being sent out. A reminder that we have certain standards here and etc etc etc" On 25 January 2016 at 12:50, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > On 25/01/2016 12:35 PM, John Sorkin wrote: >> >> When we read acerbic replies we should remind the poster to reply in a >> more moderate tone. > > As long as you do this in private, not on the list, I wouldn't object. (I'd > hope I wouldn't even know about it.) Doing it on the list is more likely to > lead to flame wars than to improved behaviour. > > As others have suggested, if you think someone has been mistreated, then the > public remedy should be to treat them well by giving a better answer > yourself. > > Duncan Murdoch > >> On the other hand noting that the list is not intended to be a source >> of answers to home work questions is 100% appropriate. This philosophy is >> intended both to keep the list from being flooded with questions and to make >> sure that no student has an unfair advantage. >> John >> >> > John David Sorkin M.D., Ph.D. >> > Professor of Medicine >> > Chief, Biostatistics and Informatics >> > University of Maryland School of Medicine Division of Gerontology and >> > Geriatric Medicine >> > Baltimore VA Medical Center >> > 10 North Greene Street >> > GRECC (BT/18/GR) >> > Baltimore, MD 21201-1524 >> > (Phone) 410-605-7119 >> > (Fax) 410-605-7913 (Please call phone number above prior to faxing) >> >> >> > On Jan 25, 2016, at 12:17 PM, Ted Harding >> > wrote: >> > >> > My feelings exactly! (And since quite some time ago). >> > Ted. >> > >> >> On 25-Jan-2016 12:23:16 Fowler, Mark wrote: >> >> I'm glad to see the issue of negative feedback addressed. I can >> >> especially >> >> relate to the 'cringe' feeling when reading some authoritarian backhand >> >> to a >> >> new user. We do see a number of obviously inappropriate or overly lazy >> >> postings, but I encounter far more postings where I don't feel >> >> competent to >> >> judge their merit. It might be better to simply disregard a posting one >> >> does >> >> not like for some reason. It might also be worthwhile to actively >> >> counter >> >> negative feedback when we experience that 'cringing' moment. I'm not >> >> thinking >> >> to foster contention, but simply to provide some tangible reassurance >> >> to new >> >> users, and not just the ones invoking the negative feedback, that a >> >> particular respondent may not represent the perspective of the list. >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> >> From: R-help [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Michael >> >> Friendly >> >> Sent: January 24, 2016 5:43 PM >> >> To: Jean-Luc Dupouey; r-help@r-project.org >> >> Subject: Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help? >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote: >> >>> Dear members, >> >>> >> >>> Not a technical question: >> >> But one worth raising... >> >>> >> >>> The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of >> >>> increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, >> >>> passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. >> >>> The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the >> >>> R-project. >> >> [snip ...] >> >>> >> >>> I hope it is the
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
Two concerns with implementing this philosophy. 1. Determining whether a question is indeed seeking an answer to a homework exercise. Certainly if I think a question is short-cutting a basic homework task I ignore it. But I don't waste an email berating the alleged student. 2. The validity of the barrier. At what point (maybe graduate levels? Nth year?) do we regard questions inspired by an educational system to be appropriate? Academia was still using mainframes when I graduated so I don't have much notion of expectations today. I'm just musing that we might be farther ahead simply opting for no response than adding another email to the queue. It also gets around needing to feel I know the answers to 1 and 2. From: John Sorkin [mailto:jsor...@grecc.umaryland.edu] Sent: January 25, 2016 1:36 PM To: ted.hard...@wlandres.net Cc: Fowler, Mark; dupo...@nancy.inra.fr; r-help@r-project.org; frien...@yorku.ca Subject: Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help? When we read acerbic replies we should remind the poster to reply in a more moderate tone. On the other hand noting that the list is not intended to be a source of answers to home work questions is 100% appropriate. This philosophy is intended both to keep the list from being flooded with questions and to make sure that no student has an unfair advantage. John John David Sorkin M.D., Ph.D. Professor of Medicine Chief, Biostatistics and Informatics University of Maryland School of Medicine Division of Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine Baltimore VA Medical Center 10 North Greene Street GRECC (BT/18/GR) Baltimore, MD 21201-1524 (Phone) 410-605-7119 (Fax) 410-605-7913 (Please call phone number above prior to faxing) On Jan 25, 2016, at 12:17 PM, Ted Harding mailto:ted.hard...@wlandres.net>> wrote: My feelings exactly! (And since quite some time ago). Ted. On 25-Jan-2016 12:23:16 Fowler, Mark wrote: I'm glad to see the issue of negative feedback addressed. I can especially relate to the 'cringe' feeling when reading some authoritarian backhand to a new user. We do see a number of obviously inappropriate or overly lazy postings, but I encounter far more postings where I don't feel competent to judge their merit. It might be better to simply disregard a posting one does not like for some reason. It might also be worthwhile to actively counter negative feedback when we experience that 'cringing' moment. I'm not thinking to foster contention, but simply to provide some tangible reassurance to new users, and not just the ones invoking the negative feedback, that a particular respondent may not represent the perspective of the list. -Original Message- From: R-help [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Michael Friendly Sent: January 24, 2016 5:43 PM To: Jean-Luc Dupouey; r-help@r-project.org<mailto:r-help@r-project.org> Subject: Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help? On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote: Dear members, Not a technical question: But one worth raising... The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project. [snip ...] I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, In addition to the other replies, there is another trend I've seen that has actively worked to suppress discussion on R-help and move it elsewhere. The general things: - R-help was too unwieldy and so it was a good idea to hive-off specialized topics to various sub lists, R-SIG-Mac, R-SIG-Geo, etc. - Many people posted badly-formed questions to R-help, and so it was a good idea to develop and refer to the posting guide to mitigate the number of purely junk postings. Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: - Is this homework? We don't do homework (sometimes false alarms, where the OP has to reply to say it is not) - Didn't you bother to do your homework, RTFM, or Google? - This is off-topic because XXX (e.g., it is not strictly an R programming question). - You asked about doing XXX, but this is a stupid thing to want to do. - Don't ask here; you need to talk to a statistical consultant. I find this sad in a public mailing list sent to all R-help subscribers and I sometimes cringe when I read replies to people who were actually trying to get help with some R-related problem, but expressed it badly, didn't know exactly what to ask for, or how to format it, or somehow motivated a frequent-replier to publicly dis the OP. On the other hand, I still see a spirit of great gener
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
On 25/01/2016 12:35 PM, John Sorkin wrote: When we read acerbic replies we should remind the poster to reply in a more moderate tone. As long as you do this in private, not on the list, I wouldn't object. (I'd hope I wouldn't even know about it.) Doing it on the list is more likely to lead to flame wars than to improved behaviour. As others have suggested, if you think someone has been mistreated, then the public remedy should be to treat them well by giving a better answer yourself. Duncan Murdoch On the other hand noting that the list is not intended to be a source of answers to home work questions is 100% appropriate. This philosophy is intended both to keep the list from being flooded with questions and to make sure that no student has an unfair advantage. John > John David Sorkin M.D., Ph.D. > Professor of Medicine > Chief, Biostatistics and Informatics > University of Maryland School of Medicine Division of Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine > Baltimore VA Medical Center > 10 North Greene Street > GRECC (BT/18/GR) > Baltimore, MD 21201-1524 > (Phone) 410-605-7119 > (Fax) 410-605-7913 (Please call phone number above prior to faxing) > On Jan 25, 2016, at 12:17 PM, Ted Harding wrote: > > My feelings exactly! (And since quite some time ago). > Ted. > >> On 25-Jan-2016 12:23:16 Fowler, Mark wrote: >> I'm glad to see the issue of negative feedback addressed. I can especially >> relate to the 'cringe' feeling when reading some authoritarian backhand to a >> new user. We do see a number of obviously inappropriate or overly lazy >> postings, but I encounter far more postings where I don't feel competent to >> judge their merit. It might be better to simply disregard a posting one does >> not like for some reason. It might also be worthwhile to actively counter >> negative feedback when we experience that 'cringing' moment. I'm not thinking >> to foster contention, but simply to provide some tangible reassurance to new >> users, and not just the ones invoking the negative feedback, that a >> particular respondent may not represent the perspective of the list. >> >> -Original Message- >> From: R-help [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Michael >> Friendly >> Sent: January 24, 2016 5:43 PM >> To: Jean-Luc Dupouey; r-help@r-project.org >> Subject: Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help? >> >> >>> On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote: >>> Dear members, >>> >>> Not a technical question: >> But one worth raising... >>> >>> The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of >>> increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, >>> passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. >>> The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the >>> R-project. >> [snip ...] >>> >>> I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, >> >> In addition to the other replies, there is another trend I've seen that has >> actively worked to suppress discussion on R-help and move it elsewhere. The >> general things: >> - R-help was too unwieldy and so it was a good idea to hive-off specialized >> topics to various sub lists, R-SIG-Mac, R-SIG-Geo, etc. >> - Many people posted badly-formed questions to R-help, and so it was a good >> idea to develop and refer to the posting guide to mitigate the number of >> purely junk postings. >> >> >> Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there >> are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently >> range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: >> >> - Is this homework? We don't do homework (sometimes false alarms, where the >> OP has to reply to say it is not) >> - Didn't you bother to do your homework, RTFM, or Google? >> - This is off-topic because XXX (e.g., it is not strictly an R programming >> question). >> - You asked about doing XXX, but this is a stupid thing to want to do. >> - Don't ask here; you need to talk to a statistical consultant. >> >> I find this sad in a public mailing list sent to all R-help subscribers and I >> sometimes cringe when I read replies to people who were actually trying to >> get help with some R-related problem, but expressed it badly, didn't know >> exactly what to ask for, or how to format it, or somehow motivated a >> frequent-replier to publicly dis the OP. >> >> On the other hand, I still
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
When we read acerbic replies we should remind the poster to reply in a more moderate tone. On the other hand noting that the list is not intended to be a source of answers to home work questions is 100% appropriate. This philosophy is intended both to keep the list from being flooded with questions and to make sure that no student has an unfair advantage. John > John David Sorkin M.D., Ph.D. > Professor of Medicine > Chief, Biostatistics and Informatics > University of Maryland School of Medicine Division of Gerontology and > Geriatric Medicine > Baltimore VA Medical Center > 10 North Greene Street > GRECC (BT/18/GR) > Baltimore, MD 21201-1524 > (Phone) 410-605-7119 > (Fax) 410-605-7913 (Please call phone number above prior to faxing) > On Jan 25, 2016, at 12:17 PM, Ted Harding wrote: > > My feelings exactly! (And since quite some time ago). > Ted. > >> On 25-Jan-2016 12:23:16 Fowler, Mark wrote: >> I'm glad to see the issue of negative feedback addressed. I can especially >> relate to the 'cringe' feeling when reading some authoritarian backhand to a >> new user. We do see a number of obviously inappropriate or overly lazy >> postings, but I encounter far more postings where I don't feel competent to >> judge their merit. It might be better to simply disregard a posting one does >> not like for some reason. It might also be worthwhile to actively counter >> negative feedback when we experience that 'cringing' moment. I'm not thinking >> to foster contention, but simply to provide some tangible reassurance to new >> users, and not just the ones invoking the negative feedback, that a >> particular respondent may not represent the perspective of the list. >> >> -Original Message- >> From: R-help [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Michael >> Friendly >> Sent: January 24, 2016 5:43 PM >> To: Jean-Luc Dupouey; r-help@r-project.org >> Subject: Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help? >> >> >>> On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote: >>> Dear members, >>> >>> Not a technical question: >> But one worth raising... >>> >>> The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of >>> increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, >>> passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. >>> The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the >>> R-project. >> [snip ...] >>> >>> I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, >> >> In addition to the other replies, there is another trend I've seen that has >> actively worked to suppress discussion on R-help and move it elsewhere. The >> general things: >> - R-help was too unwieldy and so it was a good idea to hive-off specialized >> topics to various sub lists, R-SIG-Mac, R-SIG-Geo, etc. >> - Many people posted badly-formed questions to R-help, and so it was a good >> idea to develop and refer to the posting guide to mitigate the number of >> purely junk postings. >> >> >> Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there >> are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently >> range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: >> >> - Is this homework? We don't do homework (sometimes false alarms, where the >> OP has to reply to say it is not) >> - Didn't you bother to do your homework, RTFM, or Google? >> - This is off-topic because XXX (e.g., it is not strictly an R programming >> question). >> - You asked about doing XXX, but this is a stupid thing to want to do. >> - Don't ask here; you need to talk to a statistical consultant. >> >> I find this sad in a public mailing list sent to all R-help subscribers and I >> sometimes cringe when I read replies to people who were actually trying to >> get help with some R-related problem, but expressed it badly, didn't know >> exactly what to ask for, or how to format it, or somehow motivated a >> frequent-replier to publicly dis the OP. >> >> On the other hand, I still see a spirit of great generosity among some people >> who frequently reply to R-help, taking a possibly badly posed or >> ill-formatted question, and going to some lengths to provide a a helpful >> answer of some sort. I applaud those who take the time and effort to do >> this. >> >> I use R in a number of my courses, and used to advise students to post to >> R-help for gen
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
My feelings exactly! (And since quite some time ago). Ted. On 25-Jan-2016 12:23:16 Fowler, Mark wrote: > I'm glad to see the issue of negative feedback addressed. I can especially > relate to the 'cringe' feeling when reading some authoritarian backhand to a > new user. We do see a number of obviously inappropriate or overly lazy > postings, but I encounter far more postings where I don't feel competent to > judge their merit. It might be better to simply disregard a posting one does > not like for some reason. It might also be worthwhile to actively counter > negative feedback when we experience that 'cringing' moment. I'm not thinking > to foster contention, but simply to provide some tangible reassurance to new > users, and not just the ones invoking the negative feedback, that a > particular respondent may not represent the perspective of the list. > > -Original Message- > From: R-help [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Michael > Friendly > Sent: January 24, 2016 5:43 PM > To: Jean-Luc Dupouey; r-help@r-project.org > Subject: Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help? > > > On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote: >> Dear members, >> >> Not a technical question: > But one worth raising... >> >> The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of >> increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, >> passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. >> The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the >> R-project. > [snip ...] >> >> I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, >> > > In addition to the other replies, there is another trend I've seen that has > actively worked to suppress discussion on R-help and move it elsewhere. The > general things: > - R-help was too unwieldy and so it was a good idea to hive-off specialized > topics to various sub lists, R-SIG-Mac, R-SIG-Geo, etc. > - Many people posted badly-formed questions to R-help, and so it was a good > idea to develop and refer to the posting guide to mitigate the number of > purely junk postings. > > > Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there > are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently > range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: > > - Is this homework? We don't do homework (sometimes false alarms, where the > OP has to reply to say it is not) > - Didn't you bother to do your homework, RTFM, or Google? > - This is off-topic because XXX (e.g., it is not strictly an R programming > question). > - You asked about doing XXX, but this is a stupid thing to want to do. > - Don't ask here; you need to talk to a statistical consultant. > > I find this sad in a public mailing list sent to all R-help subscribers and I > sometimes cringe when I read replies to people who were actually trying to > get help with some R-related problem, but expressed it badly, didn't know > exactly what to ask for, or how to format it, or somehow motivated a > frequent-replier to publicly dis the OP. > > On the other hand, I still see a spirit of great generosity among some people > who frequently reply to R-help, taking a possibly badly posed or > ill-formatted question, and going to some lengths to provide a a helpful > answer of some sort. I applaud those who take the time and effort to do > this. > > I use R in a number of my courses, and used to advise students to post to > R-help for general programming questions (not just homework) they couldn't > solve. I don't do this any more, because several of them reported a negative > experience. > > In contrast, in the Stackexchange model, there are numerous sublists > cross-classified by their tags. If I have a specific knitr, ggplot2, LaTeX, > or statistical modeling question, I'm now more likely to post it there, and > the worst that can happen is that no one "upvotes" it or someone (helpfully) > marks it as a duplicate of a similar question. > But comments there are not propagated to all subscribers, and those who reply > helpfully, can see their solutions accepted or not, or commented on in that > specific topic. > > Perhaps one solution would be to create a new "R-not-help" list where, as in > a Monty Python skit, people could be directed there to be insulted and all > these unhelpful replies could be sent. > > A milder alternative is to encourage some R-help subscribers to click the > "Don't send" or "Save" button and think bett
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
+1. And frankly I would like to suggest that there is another obvious solution here; pairing a set of guidelines around expected user behaviour with removing people from the mailing list, or moderating them, if they do not think that creating a non-toxic environment is good. On 25 January 2016 at 07:23, Fowler, Mark wrote: > I'm glad to see the issue of negative feedback addressed. I can especially > relate to the 'cringe' feeling when reading some authoritarian backhand to a > new user. We do see a number of obviously inappropriate or overly lazy > postings, but I encounter far more postings where I don't feel competent to > judge their merit. It might be better to simply disregard a posting one does > not like for some reason. It might also be worthwhile to actively counter > negative feedback when we experience that 'cringing' moment. I'm not thinking > to foster contention, but simply to provide some tangible reassurance to new > users, and not just the ones invoking the negative feedback, that a > particular respondent may not represent the perspective of the list. > > -Original Message- > From: R-help [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Michael > Friendly > Sent: January 24, 2016 5:43 PM > To: Jean-Luc Dupouey; r-help@r-project.org > Subject: Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help? > > > On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote: >> Dear members, >> >> Not a technical question: > But one worth raising... >> >> The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of >> increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, >> passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. >> The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the >> R-project. > [snip ...] >> >> I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, >> > > In addition to the other replies, there is another trend I've seen that has > actively worked to suppress discussion on R-help and move it elsewhere. The > general things: > - R-help was too unwieldy and so it was a good idea to hive-off specialized > topics to various sub lists, R-SIG-Mac, R-SIG-Geo, etc. > - Many people posted badly-formed questions to R-help, and so it was a good > idea to develop and refer to the posting guide to mitigate the number of > purely junk postings. > > > Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there > are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently > range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: > > - Is this homework? We don't do homework (sometimes false alarms, where the > OP has to reply to say it is not) > - Didn't you bother to do your homework, RTFM, or Google? > - This is off-topic because XXX (e.g., it is not strictly an R programming > question). > - You asked about doing XXX, but this is a stupid thing to want to do. > - Don't ask here; you need to talk to a statistical consultant. > > I find this sad in a public mailing list sent to all R-help subscribers and I > sometimes cringe when I read replies to people who were actually trying to > get help with some R-related problem, but expressed it badly, didn't know > exactly what to ask for, or how to format it, or somehow motivated a > frequent-replier to publicly dis the OP. > > On the other hand, I still see a spirit of great generosity among some people > who frequently reply to R-help, taking a possibly badly posed or > ill-formatted question, and going to some lengths to provide a a helpful > answer of some sort. I applaud those who take the time and effort to do this. > > I use R in a number of my courses, and used to advise students to post to > R-help for general programming questions (not just homework) they couldn't > solve. I don't do this any more, because several of them reported a negative > experience. > > In contrast, in the Stackexchange model, there are numerous sublists > cross-classified by their tags. If I have a specific knitr, ggplot2, LaTeX, > or statistical modeling question, I'm now more likely to post it there, and > the worst that can happen is that no one "upvotes" it or someone (helpfully) > marks it as a duplicate of a similar question. > But comments there are not propagated to all subscribers, and those who reply > helpfully, can see their solutions accepted or not, or commented on in that > specific topic. > > Perhaps one solution would be to create a new "R-not-help" list where, as in > a Monty Python skit, people could be directed there to be
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
I'm glad to see the issue of negative feedback addressed. I can especially relate to the 'cringe' feeling when reading some authoritarian backhand to a new user. We do see a number of obviously inappropriate or overly lazy postings, but I encounter far more postings where I don't feel competent to judge their merit. It might be better to simply disregard a posting one does not like for some reason. It might also be worthwhile to actively counter negative feedback when we experience that 'cringing' moment. I'm not thinking to foster contention, but simply to provide some tangible reassurance to new users, and not just the ones invoking the negative feedback, that a particular respondent may not represent the perspective of the list. -Original Message- From: R-help [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Michael Friendly Sent: January 24, 2016 5:43 PM To: Jean-Luc Dupouey; r-help@r-project.org Subject: Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help? On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote: > Dear members, > > Not a technical question: But one worth raising... > > The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of > increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, > passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. > The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project. [snip ...] > > I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, > In addition to the other replies, there is another trend I've seen that has actively worked to suppress discussion on R-help and move it elsewhere. The general things: - R-help was too unwieldy and so it was a good idea to hive-off specialized topics to various sub lists, R-SIG-Mac, R-SIG-Geo, etc. - Many people posted badly-formed questions to R-help, and so it was a good idea to develop and refer to the posting guide to mitigate the number of purely junk postings. Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: - Is this homework? We don't do homework (sometimes false alarms, where the OP has to reply to say it is not) - Didn't you bother to do your homework, RTFM, or Google? - This is off-topic because XXX (e.g., it is not strictly an R programming question). - You asked about doing XXX, but this is a stupid thing to want to do. - Don't ask here; you need to talk to a statistical consultant. I find this sad in a public mailing list sent to all R-help subscribers and I sometimes cringe when I read replies to people who were actually trying to get help with some R-related problem, but expressed it badly, didn't know exactly what to ask for, or how to format it, or somehow motivated a frequent-replier to publicly dis the OP. On the other hand, I still see a spirit of great generosity among some people who frequently reply to R-help, taking a possibly badly posed or ill-formatted question, and going to some lengths to provide a a helpful answer of some sort. I applaud those who take the time and effort to do this. I use R in a number of my courses, and used to advise students to post to R-help for general programming questions (not just homework) they couldn't solve. I don't do this any more, because several of them reported a negative experience. In contrast, in the Stackexchange model, there are numerous sublists cross-classified by their tags. If I have a specific knitr, ggplot2, LaTeX, or statistical modeling question, I'm now more likely to post it there, and the worst that can happen is that no one "upvotes" it or someone (helpfully) marks it as a duplicate of a similar question. But comments there are not propagated to all subscribers, and those who reply helpfully, can see their solutions accepted or not, or commented on in that specific topic. Perhaps one solution would be to create a new "R-not-help" list where, as in a Monty Python skit, people could be directed there to be insulted and all these unhelpful replies could be sent. A milder alternative is to encourage some R-help subscribers to click the "Don't send" or "Save" button and think better of their replies. -- Michael Friendly Email: friendly AT yorku DOT ca Professor, Psychology Dept. & Chair, Quantitative Methods York University Voice: 416 736-2100 x66249 Fax: 416 736-5814 4700 Keele StreetWeb: http://www.datavis.ca Toronto, ONT M3J 1P3 CANADA __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
I think this mailing list is wonderful and it has helped me a lot. In fact, I am not sure I would be using R today if it was not for this list. Bob On 1/24/2016 4:42 PM, Michael Friendly wrote: On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote: Dear members, Not a technical question: But one worth raising... The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project. [snip ...] I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, In addition to the other replies, there is another trend I've seen that has actively worked to suppress discussion on R-help and move it elsewhere. The general things: - R-help was too unwieldy and so it was a good idea to hive-off specialized topics to various sub lists, R-SIG-Mac, R-SIG-Geo, etc. - Many people posted badly-formed questions to R-help, and so it was a good idea to develop and refer to the posting guide to mitigate the number of purely junk postings. Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: - Is this homework? We don't do homework (sometimes false alarms, where the OP has to reply to say it is not) - Didn't you bother to do your homework, RTFM, or Google? - This is off-topic because XXX (e.g., it is not strictly an R programming question). - You asked about doing XXX, but this is a stupid thing to want to do. - Don't ask here; you need to talk to a statistical consultant. I find this sad in a public mailing list sent to all R-help subscribers and I sometimes cringe when I read replies to people who were actually trying to get help with some R-related problem, but expressed it badly, didn't know exactly what to ask for, or how to format it, or somehow motivated a frequent-replier to publicly dis the OP. On the other hand, I still see a spirit of great generosity among some people who frequently reply to R-help, taking a possibly badly posed or ill-formatted question, and going to some lengths to provide a a helpful answer of some sort. I applaud those who take the time and effort to do this. I use R in a number of my courses, and used to advise students to post to R-help for general programming questions (not just homework) they couldn't solve. I don't do this any more, because several of them reported a negative experience. In contrast, in the Stackexchange model, there are numerous sublists cross-classified by their tags. If I have a specific knitr, ggplot2, LaTeX, or statistical modeling question, I'm now more likely to post it there, and the worst that can happen is that no one "upvotes" it or someone (helpfully) marks it as a duplicate of a similar question. But comments there are not propagated to all subscribers, and those who reply helpfully, can see their solutions accepted or not, or commented on in that specific topic. Perhaps one solution would be to create a new "R-not-help" list where, as in a Monty Python skit, people could be directed there to be insulted and all these unhelpful replies could be sent. A milder alternative is to encourage some R-help subscribers to click the "Don't send" or "Save" button and think better of their replies. __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help?
On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote: Dear members, Not a technical question: But one worth raising... The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project. [snip ...] I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, In addition to the other replies, there is another trend I've seen that has actively worked to suppress discussion on R-help and move it elsewhere. The general things: - R-help was too unwieldy and so it was a good idea to hive-off specialized topics to various sub lists, R-SIG-Mac, R-SIG-Geo, etc. - Many people posted badly-formed questions to R-help, and so it was a good idea to develop and refer to the posting guide to mitigate the number of purely junk postings. Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: - Is this homework? We don't do homework (sometimes false alarms, where the OP has to reply to say it is not) - Didn't you bother to do your homework, RTFM, or Google? - This is off-topic because XXX (e.g., it is not strictly an R programming question). - You asked about doing XXX, but this is a stupid thing to want to do. - Don't ask here; you need to talk to a statistical consultant. I find this sad in a public mailing list sent to all R-help subscribers and I sometimes cringe when I read replies to people who were actually trying to get help with some R-related problem, but expressed it badly, didn't know exactly what to ask for, or how to format it, or somehow motivated a frequent-replier to publicly dis the OP. On the other hand, I still see a spirit of great generosity among some people who frequently reply to R-help, taking a possibly badly posed or ill-formatted question, and going to some lengths to provide a a helpful answer of some sort. I applaud those who take the time and effort to do this. I use R in a number of my courses, and used to advise students to post to R-help for general programming questions (not just homework) they couldn't solve. I don't do this any more, because several of them reported a negative experience. In contrast, in the Stackexchange model, there are numerous sublists cross-classified by their tags. If I have a specific knitr, ggplot2, LaTeX, or statistical modeling question, I'm now more likely to post it there, and the worst that can happen is that no one "upvotes" it or someone (helpfully) marks it as a duplicate of a similar question. But comments there are not propagated to all subscribers, and those who reply helpfully, can see their solutions accepted or not, or commented on in that specific topic. Perhaps one solution would be to create a new "R-not-help" list where, as in a Monty Python skit, people could be directed there to be insulted and all these unhelpful replies could be sent. A milder alternative is to encourage some R-help subscribers to click the "Don't send" or "Save" button and think better of their replies. -- Michael Friendly Email: friendly AT yorku DOT ca Professor, Psychology Dept. & Chair, Quantitative Methods York University Voice: 416 736-2100 x66249 Fax: 416 736-5814 4700 Keele StreetWeb: http://www.datavis.ca Toronto, ONT M3J 1P3 CANADA __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity
One additional point: On 23/01/2016 8:33 AM, Duncan Murdoch wrote: distinction between answers and comments, it's gamification (badges, One advantage of Stackoverflow is that you can go back and correct silly errors (like misspelling "its"). Duncan Murdoch __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity
On Sat, 23 Jan 2016, Duncan Murdoch wrote: I don't see duplication as counterproductive -- some people like one style, some like the other, both will find answers. Duncan, There's another factor to add to your list. Mail lists, such as r-help and the various SIGs _push_ messages to subscribers' mail boxes. Check your mail and the threads can be followed. From the subscriber's perspective it's passive. Web fora require subscribers to _pull_ messages by pointing their browser to that URL, logging in, finding the appropriate forum, and viewing threads. From the subscriber's perspective it's active. I'm one of the former types of participant. I subscribe to multiple mail lists and review new messages several times a day when time permits or I have another reason to do so. I'm rarely on a web forum because it requires much more time away from business than does a mail list. Just another perspective, Rich __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity
On 23/01/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote: Dear members, Not a technical question: The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project. I cannot imagine the total number of R-related inquiries on the Internet decreased. It means that contributors have gone elsewhere. Indeed, in the meantime, the number of R posts on stackoverflow passed from 2K to 100K between 2009 and 2015. Thus my question: what are the specificities, the plus and minus of the R-project mailing lists, in comparison with other lists, and especially in comparison with stackoverflow? A lot of threads are duplicated on both lists, which seems to me a little bit counterproductive. I don't see duplication as counterproductive -- some people like one style, some like the other, both will find answers. However, I think there is less duplication than you might think in many areas. Mailing lists are preferable when the people who are good at answering your questions use the mailing lists; Stackoverflow is preferable when the good answers are there. I generally prefer the mailing lists, though I occasionally participate on Stackoverflow. The reasons I prefer them: 1. Permanence. If Stackoverflow shuts down tomorrow, all posts there will likely disappear. There are several locations that archive the mailing list posts. I have local copies of a few thousand posts on my own laptop. 2. Familiarity. I've been using the mailing lists for 20 years, and its easier to continue than to change. If you're more familiar with the Stackoverflow process, you'll probably prefer that. 3. Simplicity. This may be a repeat of 2, but the Stackoverflow distinction between answers and comments, it's gamification (badges, special privileges to high scorers, etc.) just seems unnecessarily ornate. 4. Interaction. The mailing lists are a series of conversations, whereas Stackoverflow is more like Wikipedia, i.e. a joint project to which you can contribute. (Maybe there are conversations on Stackoverflow as well, but I'm not a big enough user to know about them.) If I look at my own recent record, I tend to answer far more questions on the mailing lists, but ask more on Stackoverflow. I think this is due to my original point: the experts in the topics I'm asking about are more likely to be there than here. Duncan Murdoch P.S. Your statistics are a little misleading: you counted threads in one R mailing list in one year, and cumulative questions in all R topics over 7 years in Stackoverflow, so the difference in traffic isn't as large as your numbers look at first glance. However, I think it is true that the mailing list traffic declined and Stackoverflow increased over that period. __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity
Hi, from my perspective as R user and package maintainer I would consider the normalization of the r-help mailing list a good sign. r-help is still a good place for general questions, while more specific discussions moved to the r-sig-... mailing lists. Maybe a slight reduction can also be a motivation for more people to step in again answering questions. Thomas Am 23.01.2016 um 13:28 schrieb Jean-Luc Dupouey: Dear members, Not a technical question: The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project. I cannot imagine the total number of R-related inquiries on the Internet decreased. It means that contributors have gone elsewhere. Indeed, in the meantime, the number of R posts on stackoverflow passed from 2K to 100K between 2009 and 2015. Thus my question: what are the specificities, the plus and minus of the R-project mailing lists, in comparison with other lists, and especially in comparison with stackoverflow? A lot of threads are duplicated on both lists, which seems to me a little bit counterproductive. I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, Jean-Luc Dupouey __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
[R] R-help mailing list activity
Dear members, Not a technical question: The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project. I cannot imagine the total number of R-related inquiries on the Internet decreased. It means that contributors have gone elsewhere. Indeed, in the meantime, the number of R posts on stackoverflow passed from 2K to 100K between 2009 and 2015. Thus my question: what are the specificities, the plus and minus of the R-project mailing lists, in comparison with other lists, and especially in comparison with stackoverflow? A lot of threads are duplicated on both lists, which seems to me a little bit counterproductive. I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, Jean-Luc Dupouey __ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
