|
|  |
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]
Re: st: A wish list for Statalist
It can't be assumed that bandwidth nor drive space are not an issue at
all and this invalidates all the pro-HTML argumentation as I see it.
Maybe in US there is no problems regarding these two but US is not the
entire world. Even as I usually have pretty nice cable connection, there
are weeks when I download all email through my cellular (and it's damn
expensive) and write replies offline. Thus everything in HTML and with
attachments will be ignored as a general rule. It also means that
web-based list it not an option and you are trying to deny me access to
Statalist which is not a nice thing to do.
I'm even not going to discuss all the mess generated by the misformed
Microsoft HTML and how different browsers can totally scramble up webpages.
In the end I totally agree with the Occam's razor idea and would like to
point out a very beneficial rule I'm always reminding myself - a KISS
rule (Keep It Simple Stupid). In this case txt is simpler than html and
should therefore be preferred. The more complicated it gets, the more
prone to errors it is (there's even Murphy's law for this - "Everything
that can go wrong, does")
Best regards,
Taavi
roy wada wrote:
Phil Schumm raised a number of issues, mainly to the effect that the
status quo is just fine.
1. HTML
Let's just say that the bandwidth is not an issue at all. The requried
bandwidth and hard drive space for HTML would be dirt cheap. Not
having HTML is currently inconveniencing many people, as discussed
many times on the list, who have difficult times turning off HTML and
the rest of us having to see it. If your email account is filtering
HTML, then add Statalist to your protected list. This is not an issue.
HTML has nice features, like having the texts line up correctly. I
have seen people adding a return characters (hit "enter") at the end
of every line in order make it look pretty. This type of primitive
solutions would not be necessary with HTML. I would say that a
majority of email accounts come with HTML as the default, and that
there are many lists which do allow HTML. Archiving is archiving, with
or without HTML. They can deal with it.
2. Updated forum format
Having posted to Statalist a number of times, I would say that it is
more time consuming to answer a simple question under the current set
up. Take this thread, for example. In order to post this reply, I had
to go through my email account, make sure the subject line is correct,
and aim it at the Harvard server. If I made an error in the posting, I
cannot even fix it except by making more postings.
By having a web-based Statalist, the threads will always line up
correctly. One click and you are good to go. Easily editied. I don't
have to hunt down previous postings. It lowers the hurdles towards
online discussion. I don't have to deal with multiple windows in order
to get the necessary information in front of me. I would say that
having to use my own mailer to "thread these, search them, and even
set up automatic categories," is merely raising hurdles against the
online communication.
Having looked at other "expert listings," and having read few comments
said there, I would say that the current set up at Statalist is
actually reducing the amount of expertise available. I would also say
that having to go through the email has signficantly reduced my own
posting to Statalist (which may not be a bad thing).
The people doing the asking are motivated, so they will go through the
hurdles. The people doing the answering, well, these people are
generous as I have said before. The resident experts are indeed
dedicated, and if I were one, I would want a dedicated interface for
it. If I were a resident expert, how far should I go out of my way to
help someone? Why should anyone go through all these trouble to help
someone?
People have complained about bad postings (i.e. stupid questions) on
the Statalist precisely because the current set up is forcing everyone
to having to shift through them. Sub-categories, as chosen by the
poster and not the moderator, would greater reduce such shiftings.
3. The Stata Corp
Statalist is a public good (the non-rival kind). Who should put
efforts into producing an updated format of the kind I had originally
proposed? The Stata Corp is not currently doing it, since Statalist is
supposed to be maintained by the volunteers. I don't think it would be
fair to ask Marcello to spend more hours setting it up. I am not
offering to do it, since I am not as vested in maintaining it as the
Stata Corp is, although some people may feel differently in absence of
parties with larger vested interests.
To return to the point you started with, I believe there may be an
easy solution for you. Why not switch from digest to regular
delivery, and filter all Statalist messages into a dedicated mailbox.
I said earlier that "reading through the Digest is not as fun as it
used to be." Statalist has always been messy, so that was not the
point. It is not as fun for me because both the quality and the
quantity of postings appear to be slipping. I think it happened after
we went off the Yahoo listings, but that could be a coincidence. I do
believe the Digest has been somewhat erratic during the past year.
I'm afraid I don't see how what you are proposing would be any less
demanding or more egalitarian than the current list. In fact, an
online forum where a "moderator" would "clean up" and reorganize
postings strikes me as both more demanding and less egalitarian.
Let's not misconstrue. For the record, it's LESS DEMANDING to use,
MORE EGALITARIAN by lowering the hurdles, and the MODERATOR for fixing
the broken threads, which often stay broken in Statalist. It's bad for
archiving, which is one of the primary attraction for Statalist. Some
people have, in the past, fixed broken threads by reposting the entire
exchanges verbatim, which in my opinion is a messy way for fixing
things, and forcing everyone to see it again.
FWIW, the preceeding paragraph could have been emphasized better using
HTML italics AND posted much faster using an updated web-based forum
format. I have to say that having to go through multiple windows in
writing this reply is sucking up my time.
_________________________________________________________________
Find sales, coupons, and free shipping, all in one place! MSN
Shopping Sales & Deals
http://shopping.msn.com/content/shp/?ctid=198,ptnrid=176,ptnrdata=200639
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
