[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
David Souther <[email protected]> |

To |
[email protected] |

Subject |
Re: st: significant digits format |

Date |
Tue, 12 Jan 2010 12:53:43 -0600 |

Marcello is right...I didn't see his message before my latest post. I wasn't trying to keep this going beyond his post. On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Marcello Pagano <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Listers, > > Before this `Wadagate N+1', for who knows what N, gets too far, let us hope > that before such vituperative labels are used some care is taken at deciding > the justification of the accusations. This might be interesting if we were > comparing the contributions of John Napier, and ironically, another Swiss, > Joost Burgi, vis a vis the invention of logarithms, but before we ask either > of them to apologize to Roy Wada for copying his idea, let us realize that > the two lines of code in question owe their genesis to Napier/Burgi and that > subsequently it is the most obvious way to solve the *same* problem. I hope > that Listers will look at the rest of the two sets of code put forth by Wada > and Ben Jann to see whether the approaches are even the same, other than the > similarity of this one line, let alone similarity in code in general, before > expressing opinions and accusations. > > Statalist is not intended as a location for public catharsis. Rather it is > intended as a way to help with Stata and statistical advancement. We > sympathize with the need some people feel for emotional outlets, but this is > not the best place for it and it is certainly not fair on the targets. So > please Listers, show some restraint. > > Thanks, > > m.p. > > > David Souther wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Roy Wada <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> No, Ben. You are acting like a student who gets caught and complains >>> that he did not understand that paraphrasing someone's work without >>> citation is plagiarism. >>> >>> Yours: local left = int(log10(abs(`value'))+1) // digits before >>> dp >>> Mine: local left=int(ln(abs(`input'))/ln(10)+1) >>> >>> >> >> At some level every program is probably inspired by some part of other >> programs. >> Both of these look exactly like the variations of formulas I've seen >> used in Excel or VB script to get at this same issue (though the excel >> version looks more like >> "=ROUND(value,sigfigs-(1+INT(LOG10(ABS(value))))" ). A google search >> of a formula for significant digits turns up both of these approaches >> in Excel & VB (as I imagine it would in other stats packages). I >> think if you compare packages with similar functionality in Stata, >> there will be lots of similar approaches to create that same >> functionality--there are really only so many ways that you can do >> things in Stata (at least, do them efficiently). >> >> Ben has acknowledged that his programs were influenced by >> outreg/outreg2 (in fact, it says it was 'stolen' (flippantly, I >> imagine) in the .ado file--though I have no idea if this >> acknowledgement came after some prodding by Roy), and Ben has >> indicated in other postings that he was building upon existing >> knowledge. That is something that is desirable and accepted in >> academic work; what's the benefit of starting from scratch every time? >> If Ben wanted to create an outreg-like program with a different >> syntax approach & different goals for its functionality that he found >> useful, why should he be expected to reinvent the wheel blindly in >> order to arrive at something with overlapping functionality ? Though >> I'm not an expert on either package, I tend to prefer the syntax and >> output that esttab/estout creates, I'm glad that these packages were >> created. >> >> What's more, I haven't seen any guidelines on Stata or SSC (or in >> open-source programming in general) that defines how authors must cite >> others' open-source work or that prohibits someone from using other >> code to help recreate functionality. I don't see that you have any >> kind of creative commons or copyright on your adofile. >> >> >> >>> >>> By your own words, this is a "stolen" work. This makes it a >>> plagiarized work. And that makes you a plagiarist. This is >>> unprofessional and academically dishonest. It needs to stop. >>> >>> The prattle about being similar or not similar is beneath you. >>> -sigdig- is a rewriting of SignificantDigits. I don't keep tabs on >>> what you do. I take people at their word, but your words fail me. >>> >>> You are fooling yourself and many others if you say that you are >>> making useful contributions by deliberately knocking off other >>> people's work to the point of extracting codes and inserting them into >>> yours, putting your name on top, and misrepresenting yourself as the >>> contributing author. >>> >>> It seems you are unable to correct these errors on your own. Based on >>> the earlier post, you seem to think there was nothing wrong. Listen to >>> me carefully because you don't seem to appreciate the enormity of what >>> you have done. You have a history of taking other people's work and >>> misrepresenting yourself as the orignal author. >>> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> -esttab- is a plagiarized work. It is based largely on -outreg2-. This >>> was something that you could not have written on your own. It would be >>> nice to if you could have, but based on your other work this was >>> apparently something that was beyond you. What you did was blatant and >>> shameful. So shameful in fact that I don't know why you are making me >>> come out and say these things. >>> >>> -estout- is loosely base on the original -outreg-. By distributing the >>> program without giving adequate credit to the original source (not >>> given in the help file, not in the website, not the handouts and >>> presentations floating around), you have plagiarized John's work. This >>> has greatly hurt John's reputation, giving rise to the impression that >>> there was something wrong with his work. >>> >>> >> >> >> >> Thus far, you've presented two similar lines for a common approach to >> a formula as your evidence. I think these kinds of accusations demand >> that you give us more. Where's the line-by-line or >> subroutine-by-subroutine comparisons of code that definitively prove >> these statements? If you really think the code is that similar, file a >> DMCA takedown. >> >> >> >> >>> >>> This was completely untrue and highly unfair. Unlike you, John was >>> highly original. I admire originality. I don't expect you to share my >>> values, but I do have problems with people who do not understand any >>> of this yet wishes to present themselves as a scholar. Scholar you are >>> not. Scholars respect the integrity of other's work. Author you are >>> not. Authorship does not consist of "stolen" work. >>> >>> >> >> >> I think the Stata community is pretty lucky that authors like Roy, >> Ben, and John would create these useful and important packages, but I >> also think we are lucky that Stata allows a forum for us to exchange >> and share these add-ons free of charge. Not all stats software >> companies allow this sort of thing. In this sort of environment, I >> expect that there will be similar/redundant packages that come about >> and it is up to the user to decide which package works best for them. >> >> * >> * For searches and help try: >> * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search >> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq >> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ >> > > * > * For searches and help try: > * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search > * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq > * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ > * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**References**:**st: significant digits format***From:*Jacob Wegelin <[email protected]>

**Re: st: significant digits format***From:*Roy Wada <[email protected]>

**Re: st: significant digits format***From:*Roy Wada <[email protected]>

**Re: st: significant digits format***From:*Ben Jann <[email protected]>

**Re: st: significant digits format***From:*Roy Wada <[email protected]>

**Re: st: significant digits format***From:*David Souther <[email protected]>

**Re: st: significant digits format***From:*Marcello Pagano <[email protected]>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: AW: AW: AW: st: Increasing Stata Memory** - Next by Date:
**AW: AW: AW: AW: st: Increasing Stata Memory** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: significant digits format** - Next by thread:
**st: programing question** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2024 StataCorp LLC | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |