[R] The Origins of R

Thu Feb 5 17:10:19 CET 2009

Consider yourself lucky!
I'm sure there are many people who would
prefer not to see their name in the NYT. ;-)

Murray Coooper

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Duncan Murdoch" <murdoch at stats.uwo.ca>
To: "Mark Difford" <mark_difford at yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: <r-help at r-project.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: [R] The Origins of R

> On 2/5/2009 1:05 AM, Mark Difford wrote:
>>>> I think that all appeared on January 8 in Vance's blog posting, with a 
>>>> comment on it by David M Smith on Jan 9.  So those people have -27 days
>>
>> Then there was no need for vituperative comments (not from you, of 
>> course):
>> simply point doubters to the right place, as you have done. But Mr. 
>> Vance's
>> comments only deepen the "mystery."
>>
>> If Mr. Vance was aware of the true origins of R, why did he choose to
>> misrepresent them in his article, which is what got the publicity and 
>> which
>> is the item that most people saw/read? Most right-thinking people don't,
>> wouldn't, or haven't taken the matter further than that. Their 
>> criticisms,
>> as mine have been, have been aimed at the NY Times and Mr. Vance's lack 
>> of
>> ethics. It also seems clear from Mr. Vance's comments that there was no
>> editorial or sub-editorial meddling.
>
> That's not what I read in the posting to this list that I cited.
>
> I doubt if Ashlee Vance is reading this list, so it doesn't really seem 
> fair to blame him if he doesn't respond to your attacks.
>
> So I'm not complaining, but the main problem I saw in his article was that 
> it didn't mention me.  I knew Robert Gentleman (even had an office next to 
> him!) before he started R:  surely that must have been a key influence. 
> Why else did he move to the far side of the globe?  And not only that, but 
> to compound the insult, the NY Times has failed to mention me every day 
> since then!
>
> Duncan Murdoch
>
>>
>> The knee-jerk reaction ? Well, it is almost amusing to see how sensitive
>> some very hard-nosed individuals on this list can be, or have become.
>>
>> Regards, Mark.
>>
>> still to wait.
>>
>> Duncan Murdoch-2 wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2/4/2009 3:53 PM, Mark Difford wrote:
>>>>>> >>> Indeed.  The postings exuded a tabloid-esque level of slimy
>>>>>>>>  nastiness.
>>>>
>>>> Hi Rolf,
>>>>
>>>> It is good to have clarification, for you wrote "..,the postings...,"
>>>> tarring everyone with the same brush. And it was quite a nasty brush. 
>>>> It
>>>> also is conjecture that "this was due to an editor or sub-editor," i.e.
>>>> the
>>>> botched article.
>>>>
>>>> I think that what some people are waiting for are factual statements 
>>>> from
>>>> the parties concerned. Conjecture is, well, little more than 
>>>> conjecture.
>>>
>>> I think that all appeared on January 8 in Vance's blog posting, with a 
>>> comment on it by David M Smith on Jan 9.  So those people have -27 days 
>>> still to wait.
>>>
>>> Duncan Murdoch
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Mark.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rolf Turner-3 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/02/2009, at 8:15 PM, Mark Difford wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Indeed.  The postings exuded a tabloid-esque level of slimy 
>>>>>>>> nastiness.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Indeed, indeed. But I do not feel that that is necessarily the  case. 
>>>>>> Credit
>>>>>> should be given where credit is due. And that, I believe is the 
>>>>>> issue that
>>>>>> is getting (some) people hot and bothered. Certainly, Trevor Hastie 
>>>>>> in his
>>>>>> reply to the NY Times article, was not too happy with this aspect  of 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> story.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Granted, his comments were not made on this list, but the objection 
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> essentially the same. I would not call what he had to say "Mischief 
>>>>>> making"
>>>>>> or smacking of a "tabloid-esque level of slimy nastiness." The knee- 
>>>>>> jerk
>>>>>> reaction seems to be that this is a criticism of R. It is not. It is 
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> criticism of a poorly researched article.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It also is an undeniable and inescapable fact that most S code runs 
>>>>>> in R.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is not with criticism of the NY Times article, although 
>>>>> as Pat
>>>>> Burns and others have pointed out this criticism was somewhat 
>>>>> misdirected
>>>>> and unrealistic considering the exigencies of newspaper editing.  The 
>>>>> problem
>>>>> was with a number of posts that cast aspersions upon the integrity of
>>>>> Ihaka and Gentleman.  It is these posts that exuded tabloid-esque 
>>>>> slimy
>>>>> nastiness.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am sure that Ross and Robert would never dream of failing to give 
>>>>> credit
>>>>> where credit is due and it is almost certainly the case that they 
>>>>> explained
>>>>> the origins of R in the S language to the writer of the NYT article 
>>>>> (wherefrom
>>>>> the explanation was cut in the editing process).
>>>>>
>>>>> Those of us on this list (with the possible exception of one or two 
>>>>> nutters)
>>>>> would take it that it goes without saying that R was developed on the 
>>>>> basis
>>>>> of S --- we all ***know*** that.  To impugn the integrity of Ihaka 
>>>>> and Gentleman,
>>>>> because an article which *they didn't write* failed to mention this 
>>>>> fact, is
>>>>> unconscionable.
>>>>>
>>>>> cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rolf Turner
>>>>>
>>>>> ######################################################################
>>>>> Attention:\ This e-mail message is privileged and 
>>>>> confid...{{dropped:9}}
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________________________
>>>>> R-help at r-project.org mailing list
>>>>> 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 at r-project.org mailing list
>>> 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 at r-project.org mailing list
> 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.
>