Who's "we" here? (Simple question: no offence inferred or implied.)
I agree completely with Jay that models that don't converge, or don't
converge satisfactorily, are a frequent source of puzzlement on this
list, especially but not only to beginning users.
I really don't want to add to the Statalist FAQ any material under
such a heading. The focus of the Statalist FAQ is how to use
Statalist, and what you (may) need to know to understand Statalist.
Things that puzzle people about statistics or Stata do not belong.
Jay is probably not suggesting that. In terms of StataCorp's "own"
FAQs by far the quickest way to get an FAQ posted is to write it
yourself! A quick search (or indeed -search-) shows that many FAQs are
user-written.
Nick
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:57 PM, JVerkuilen (Gmail)
<jvverkuilen@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 9:27 AM, Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> wrote:
>> There is unfortunately no point in trying to interpret the result of
>> this fit. The intercept has exploded to 3.9 x 10^116 and no standard
>> error can be calculated for it. Conversely, the coefficient has a
>> suspiciously narrow c.i. of [.8763176,.8763978]. I'll wager that
>> nothing in epidemiology is that certain, other than the probability
>> that we all die sometime.
>
> I think we might want to put something in the FAQ about divergent
> models. Mind you it probably won't be read, but it might help.
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
