Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
st: RE: urgency (again) [was: Re: statalist-digest V4 #4296]
From
Nick Cox <[email protected]>
To
"'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
Subject
st: RE: urgency (again) [was: Re: statalist-digest V4 #4296]
Date
Wed, 5 Oct 2011 17:35:36 +0100
Thanks for this suggestion, which we will think about. Also, some people have sent in views privately, including very firm defences of the existing statement, which need consideration.
I think the main point about claims of urgency is that they are futile in practice, quite apart from the irritation that they cause some of us. The main advice is: Don't do that, because it won't help and it may well harm your chances of getting a good answer.
If anyone says that they would try to answer an urgent email more quickly, or more thoroughly, or rather than one not claiming urgency, then I am wrong; i.e. those people evidently would pay more attention to claims of urgency.
However, I don't really want to enlarge a debate that I don't see as necessary.