st: Silly questions, simple questions and the like

[Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>]

I try not to be distracted by whether people describe their questions
as simple, silly, or whatever. Like most people, I don't always live
up to my principles, but there you go.

I've seen "simple" questions that I didn't understand, and "silly"
questions arising out of genuine difficulties. So, the words mean
little and should not be taken too seriously.

I think the complex and perhaps inconsistent pattern of expectations
on this list does include the following.

0. The FAQ is not intended to lay down a set of rules to trip up
newcomers. It is intended to provide detailed advice so that you can
get a good answer that arrives quickly and is clear, correct, and
complete.

1. People are expected to have a go at reading the documentation. That
means the help and manuals first. It's true that if you have a problem
someone else is likely to have had it earlier and asked on Statalist,
but searching the archives first is not always a good tactic. The
StataCorp FAQs are intended to fill in the gaps in the manuals. They
are perhaps best on stuff that needs two or three commands put
together to solve a problem, or extras that you want that StataCorp in
its wisdom does not supply, but with good reason.

2. Being a beginner is not something to apologise for, but it is a
curable condition. Expecting you to be able to learn fast is a
compliment, not a criticism.

3. Being confused tends to get indulged, although the errror of your
ways may get exposed.

4. Looking downright lazy and unwilling to help yourself does not do
you any favours.

5. People who answer just know more Stata than you do. They cannot see
your data, know exactly what you typed or what "didn't work", or know
what is your real problem unless you tell them. Not telling people
your problem precisely, concisely and clearly does qualify as a silly
question.

6. People who answer questions a lot on this list don't expect
deference, but they have rights too. One is the personal and
collective  right to be capricious. So one person may be given a
complete chunk of code, another person be set a reading list, while
yet another person is ignored. There's obvious specialisation: people
who answer major on instrumental variables, survey, whatever. But
there's no demon or committee behind the scenes dividing up your
questions, so sometimes some just slip through. Sorry; you got what
you paid for. Sometimes, you got a short answer because the other
person is just too busy, about to give a lecture, or go to lunch,

Nick
*
*   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/