Skip to content
Prev 37458 / 63424 Next

No RTFM?

I completely agree with you, John.  In my view, there is no need for
explicit RTFM or GLOG statements.  

Best,
Ravi.

-----Original Message-----
From: r-devel-bounces at r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-bounces at r-project.org]
On Behalf Of P J JAYNES
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 4:40 PM
To: kw.stat at gmail.com; spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com
Cc: r-devel at r-project.org
Subject: Re: [Rd] No RTFM?


Hello,
 
 I have found the people associated with this list to be VERY helpful over
the years. This is especially appreciated as, some of my answers have come
from the same people who are busy improving R: a fascinating, potent set of
software tools, excellently supported. In my humble opinion, the anti-thesis
of a commercial for profit software analogue.
 
Good Luck to you,
 
John
 
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:06:05 -0500
From: kw.stat at gmail.com
To: spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com
CC: r-devel at r-project.org
Subject: Re: [Rd] No RTFM?

Recently I was visiting with people about why commercial support is needed
for some people using R.  One person observed:
 
With commercial support, you have a person that you can call with questions
and yell at.
With R mailing lists, you can ask questions and have people yell at YOU.
 
The atmosphere of the R-help and R-devel mailing lists is infamous.  Is this
a good reputation to have?  I'm doubtful that it is.
 
So, I support Spencer's suggestion for more civility.
 
Kevin Wright
 
 
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Spencer Graves <
spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com> wrote:

            
--
Kevin Wright
 
 

______________________________________________ R-devel at r-project.org mailing
list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel