st: Fw: UNSUSCRIBE rdesantis@istat.it

["roberta desantis" <rdesantis@istat.it>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "roberta desantis" <rdesantis@istat.it>
To: "StataCorp LP" <noreply@stata.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 11:09 AM
Subject: Re: UNSUSCRIBE rdesantis@istat.it


> I am extremely sorry but I followed he right procedure as indicated in the
> FAQ and the majordomo is always answering that con not recognize the
> message. I would be very grateful if you could unsuscribe me from 
> statalist
> thank you in advance
> rds
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "StataCorp LP" <noreply@stata.com>
> To: <rdesantis@istat.it>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 9:45 AM
> Subject: UNSUSCRIBE rdesantis@istat.it
>
>
> > Dear roberta desantis <rdesantis@istat.it>,
> >
> > You sent email to Statalist <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> and
> > Majordomo,
> > the Statalist software, bounced it.  The email you sent is attached 
> > below,
> > but
> > the most likely reason for the bounce is:
> >
> > Admin request: /^subject:\s*uns\w*b/i
> >
> > Majordomo might also have bounced it for any of the following reasons:
> >
> >    1.  You are not subscribed to Statalist, or not subscribed
> >        under the email address from which you sent the email.
> >        Please read section 2.2 of the Statalist FAQ for advice
> >        on this issue:
> >
> >          http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/statalist.html#toask
> >
> >    2.  You sent the email in HTML format.  Please read section 2.2 of
> >        the Statalist FAQ for advice on this:
> >
> >          http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/statalist.html#toask
> >
> >    3.  You sent a subscription request to the wrong address.  To
> >        subscribe, send an email to majordomo@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
> >        with "subscribe statalist" in the body of the message, not
> >        in the subject line.  The subject line does not matter.  Please
> >        use plain text when communicating with the majordomo software.
> >
> >    4.  You sent an unsubscription request to the wrong address.  To
> >        unsubscribe, send an email to majordomo@hsphsun2.harvard.edu with
> >        "unsubscribe statalist" in the body of the message, not
> >        in the subject line.  The subject line does not matter.
> >
> >    5.  Your email contained a word in its first few lines which majordomo
> >        thought was an administrative request intended for majordomo,
> >        such as "help", "subscribe", or "unsubscribe".  Avoid these
> >        words in the first few lines of your email.
> >
> > There are other possibilities.  See the Statalist FAQ, and especially
> > section 2.2, at http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/statalist.html
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Statalist
> >
> > P.S.  Why is this email coming from stata.com?  I thought Statalist
> >      was independently operated!
> >
> >      Answer:  It is.  Marcello Pagano, Statalist's moderator,
> >      posted the following on Statalist on March 11, 2010:
> >
> >        As Statalist has grown, so have the number of problem emails
> >        sent to Statalist that don't appear on the list for one reason
> >        or another.  People try to post on Statalist who are not
> >        subscribers. Subscribers sometimes send valid email, but in
> >        HTML format. Subscription and unsubscription requests are
> >        sometimes sent to the list rather than to majordomo.
> >        In general there are 50 to 100 problem emails per day! Up
> >        until now, we've been handling them by hand.
> >
> >        This cannot continue. There is an alternative. I've talked to
> >        StataCorp and we can forward all the bounced messages to them
> >        and they can set up an automatic response system to send the
> >        email back to the sender along with some indication of the
> >        problem.
> >
> >        I want to take advantage of their offer to help, but I do not
> >        want anyone to think that StataCorp's involvement is anything
> >        more than helping with this technical issue.  All emails that
> >        get posted the list will still be posted to the list without
> >        ever going to StataCorp and not subject to any censoring.
> >        All StataCorp will receive are the emails Statalist would have
> >        bounced anyway, and all they will be doing is using their
> >        software to analyze those emails and send back an automated
> >        response to the sender.
> >
> >        I assume everyone is okay with that. If someone is not,
> >        I'm willing to forward the bounces to them and let them
> >        handle them :-)
> >
> > Here is the email you sent to statalist@hsphsun2.havard.edu:
> >
> > Received: from guardian2.sph.harvard.edu (guardian2.sph.harvard.edu
> > [134.174.190.4])
> > by hsphsun2.harvard.edu (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.7) with ESMTP id p2M9V1t03951
> > for <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 05:31:01 -0400
> > (EDT)
> > Received: from posta1.istat.it (posta1.istat.it [193.204.90.138]) by
> > guardian2.sph.harvard.edu with ESMTP id qaNyFdsOSRUgT6f9 for
> > <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 05:31:00 -0400 (EDT)
> > X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
> > X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result:
> > AkMBAPgIiE3BzFqc/2dsb2JhbACKFY1wP40Ad4hNulqFZASZOA
> > Received: from proxyposta1.istat.it ([193.204.90.156])
> >  by posta1.istat.it with ESMTP; 22 Mar 2011 10:31:17 +0100
> > Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
> > by proxyposta1.istat.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id A67777016B
> > for <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 10:31:04 +0100
> > (CET)
> > X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at istat.it
> > Received: from proxyposta1.istat.it ([127.0.0.1])
> > by localhost (proxyposta1.istat.it [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
> > with ESMTP id 0M0QLaTAIH-2 for <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>;
> > Tue, 22 Mar 2011 10:31:04 +0100 (CET)
> > Received: from desantisR (93-63-177-225.ip28.fastwebnet.it
> > [93.63.177.225])
> > by proxyposta1.istat.it (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 77770700BA
> > for <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 10:31:04 +0100
> > (CET)
> > Message-ID: <3E45D9D1B61744C7B9E12D9F2AD56E56@desantisR>
> > From: "roberta desantis" <rdesantis@istat.it>
> > To: <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
> > References: <fc7fe8b45baa.4d873a41@univr.it>
> > <fc8afeb45430.4d8879e8@univr.it>
> > Subject: UNSUSCRIBE rdesantis@istat.it
> > Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 10:31:04 -0000
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: text/plain;
> > format=flowed;
> > charset="iso-8859-1";
> > reply-type=original
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > X-Priority: 1
> > X-MSMail-Priority: High
> > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
> > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5994
> > X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at sph.harvard.edu
> >
> > unsuscribe rdesantis@istat.it
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: <federico.tedeschi@univr.it>
> > To: <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 9:28 AM
> > Subject: st: Zero truncation in Multilevel regression
> >
> >
> > > Dear Statalist members,
> > > I'm implementing a Multilevel regression analysis, using the "gllamm"
> > > command (since levels are 3: individual, district, municipality). The
> > > outcome is a count variable, whose I consider only positive values. I'd
> > > like to replicate, in the Multilevel analysis, the same approach I can
> > > adopt in the one-level regression, in particular with respect to
> > > overdispersion and zero-truncation.
> > > As for the former issue, I can't use a Negative Binomial distribution
> > > (since it is not among the ones performed by gllamm), but I can include 
> > > a
> > > Random effect at the individual level (obviously, choosing the Poisson
> > > distribution).
> > > On the contrary, with respect to zero-truncation, I don't know what to
> > > do.
> > > As regards censoring and truncation, I see it is implemented, in Stata,
> > > in
> > > the case of Gaussian distribution, Survival analysis and Panel data. 
> > > With
> > > zero-truncated count variables, in the one-level case, I can use the
> > > command "ztp" for Poisson regressions (in case of the Negative Binomial,
> > > "ztnb"). But, in the case of Multilevel regression, I didn't find any 
> > > way
> > > to "inform" Stata that my dependent variable is zero-truncated.
> > > Since my outcome assumes values ranging from 1 to 586 and it is highly
> > > asymmetric (its median value is 2) I can't use either the Multinomial
> > > distribution, nor the Gaussian one.
> > > Do you have any suggestions on how to solve this issue?
> > > Thank you,
> > > Federico
> > > *
> > > *   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/