Re: st: Two points of procedure: informative titles, difficultiesin posting

[Junk <junk@spandrel.net>]

As regards [2. Difficulties in posting], I would note that the
primary reason I have occasionally posted something twice is
because, whereas your FAQ clearly states I must post from the
account that I am subscribed under (which is standard for such
mailing lists), I find that often my postings from a separate,
non-subscribed account also get through. If I inadvertently
post from the non-subscribed account, and don't see it for a
while, I will repost from the subscribed account with the standard
comment. Sometimes both postings show up, sometimes just the second
one.


Jeph




Nick Cox wrote:
> I have noticed a couple of recurrent small difficulties
> in recent postings. 
> 1. Informative titles
> =====================
>
> You are asked to use informative titles. This should 
> be what an old teacher of mine called Augustus Caesar
> (I kid you not: that was his real name) called "horse
> sense", but we still see titles like "Question". 
> This is in your own best interests. I know that many
> long-term members zap postings with titles like 
> "Question" without even reading them as being with high prior 
> probability an elementary question of no interest. 
> Therefore, to maximise your readership, 
> and to increase informativeness, do think more about 
> your title if your only thought is something 
> like "Question". 
> 2. Difficulties in posting
> ==========================
>
> A fairly common comment is that you tried posting
> something before, but are not sure that it got 
> through. This comment should not usually be necessary. 
> If something got through, it will be visible in the 
> archives. Almost always, this will be within minutes
> of posting. (The Harvard archives have a shorter 
> response time than the StataCorp archives.) So, 
> please check in the archives first. 
> The most common single reason that something
> did not get through is that you sent your
> posting in HTML or some other disapproved format. 
> Having said, HTML and similar _do_ sometimes
> get through. Don't ask me why, as I don't 
> know. But if you are in doubt about what you 
> are sending, then, again, checking in the archives 
> will show you. 
> As always, these and many other recommendations
> are detailed in the FAQ (URL below my signature). 
> Nick 
> n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk 
> *
> *   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/