Various habits on Statalist serve no useful purpose that I can see.
Here are some suggestions on what we can do without.
I don't want to (appear to) lay down the law on what may seem mostly
matters of courtesy or style. Sometimes, however, people propagate memes
that serve no real function, even decoration, charm or amusement. In
particular, emails need not take on the conventions of letters. You are
not writing to your bank manager or grandmother when you write to
Statalist.
This is a longish post on some small points, so I'll give the executive
summary first, and then the backing argument, so you can bail out as
soon as you wish. However, I think it applies to many postings, which is
my reason for sending it. If Statalist emails were a little shorter
on average, we would all gain. (To balance some long posts over
the years, I claim authorship of the shortest Statalist answer ever,
which was "C". The question was what language Stata is written in.)
------------------------------------------
Three things that help no-one
=============================
1. Dear all, Dear Statalisters, etc. [Nothing needed]
2. Best wishes, Thanks in advance, I look forward to your answer, etc.
[The single word "Please" in a good place is perfectly adequate.]
3. Indications of why your case is especially deserving of help.
------------------------------------------
1. Many postings start with an expression such as "Dear all" or "Dear
Statalisters" or some such. This does no harm, but I suggest that it is
pointless. I have done no analysis, as I am not quite that crazy, but
it seems to have increased recently, and I suspect that its use is
largely unconscious imitation.
If your post is aimed at some individual(s) in particular, then by all
means say so; otherwise this convention just adds an unnecessary line.
2. Similarly, formulae such as "Best wishes" and "Thanks in advance" are
nearly empty of content. Also, "Thanks in advance" divides the world.
Perhaps you use it because it appeals as an efficient and courteous way
of indicating the gratitude you know you will feel. But know also that many
people object to this formula too.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html records an opposite
point of view: "Some hackers feel this connotes an intention not to
thank anybody afterwards."
3. Appeals to newbie status, cluelessness, desperation, urgency, etc.,
etc., are personal details irrelevant to the interest of your question.
Also, many people object at attempts at emotional blackmail, however
slight its degree, so getting down on your knees and asking for favours
is likely to be counter-productive.
Waving newbieness at the list is like waving garlic at a vampire in old
horror films. It is, you may think, a little trick to protect yourself.
In newer horror films the vampires just laugh at garlic and bite you
anyway. In all films nice people are nice anyway and don't need pleas
for gentleness.
If you really think your question is probably too elementary, then
either don't say so, or just don't ask it. Elementary questions are
allowed. (Of course, like any other question, they may be ignored, but
that's everyone's right.)
There is also an equal rights issue. Old users, even experts, are
allowed to be confused too. (I once got an email saying, in effect, "I
am a very big fish in Stataland and asking this question in public would
be far too embarrassing." I didn't see why not.... Fortunately I have
forgotten who it was.)
As people who use programs, we are accustomed to the idea of defaults.
Let us all assume without needing silly little conventions that people
want to convey politeness and express gratitude. Please.
(P.S. that said, closure of threads is good and in my view not done
enough. Thanking someone who solved the problem and indicating what the
solution was is always welcome. Conversely, the habit of posting an
obscure question and ignoring requests for clarification is poor.)
Nick
[email protected]
*
* 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/
