[Rd] Suggestion to add crantastic to resources section onposting guide
mdowle at mdowle.plus.com
Fri Mar 5 14:30:28 CET 2010
That appears to be an epistemic error. Some people, and I would agree it
seems like an increasing number of people, clearly don't read the posting
guide. However, it is impossible for anyone to know how many people do read
it, do thoroughly read it and, therefore, don't ever need to post to r-help.
Those people would be missing from the statistical sample of people who do
post. In fact it would be very surprising indeed, assuming it is true that
R is getting more popular, to not see the numbers of non-compliant posters
I dont believe in basing decisions upon poorly applied statistics.
Especially ones that go from correlation to causation so casually.
"Gabor Grothendieck" <ggrothendieck at gmail.com> wrote in message
news:971536df1003050433i7f104bd4l1e1421fab0d3f73 at mail.gmail.com...
I don't think we should be expanding the posting guide. Its already
so long that no one reads it. We should be thinking of ways to cut it
down to a smaller size instead.
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 5:52 AM, Matthew Dowle <mdowle at mdowle.plus.com>
> Under the "further resources" section I'd like to suggest the following
> addition :
> * http://crantastic.org/ lists popular packages according to other users
> votes. Consider briefly reviewing the top 30 packages before posting to
> r-help since someone may have already released a package that solves your
> Thats just a straw man idea so I hope there will be answer, or discussion,
> either way.
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
More information about the R-devel