<>
Tiago should just "vote with his feet" and not download or use packages
which seem badly documented to him. He can find evidence of such no-nonsense
behavior when he types -ssc hot, n(10)- and looks at the well-documented
packages that the community raves about (think gllamm manual...).
HTH
Martin
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Nick Cox
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. Februar 2009 18:05
An: [email protected]
Betreff: st: RE: Re: How does -kwallis2- compute adjusted p-values for
significance?
Thanks for this. My central point remains that no-one is likely to
change their help files unless specific weaknesses are brought to their
attention. Just saying that standards are poor won't trigger many
improvements, regardless of whether you are right or wrong.
Anyway, the trade balance still looks good. You routinely use >40
packages, so they can't be that lousy; otherwise you would presumably
write your own instead.
Nick
[email protected]
Tiago
Thank you Nick and Kit for your feedback.
Sorry about that, Nick.
If I were a native english speaker (or had a few minutes more per day) I
would certainly try to be less "diffuse and exaggerated to allow a
worthwhile detailed reply". Adjusting for these two confounders, I think
my previous message expresses the truth, and only the truth.
*
* 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/
