Dear members, Not a technical question: The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project. I cannot imagine the total number of R-related inquiries on the Internet decreased. It means that contributors have gone elsewhere. Indeed, in the meantime, the number of R posts on stackoverflow passed from 2K to 100K between 2009 and 2015. Thus my question: what are the specificities, the plus and minus of the R-project mailing lists, in comparison with other lists, and especially in comparison with stackoverflow? A lot of threads are duplicated on both lists, which seems to me a little bit counterproductive. I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, Jean-Luc Dupouey
Hi, from my perspective as R user and package maintainer I would consider the normalization of the r-help mailing list a good sign. r-help is still a good place for general questions, while more specific discussions moved to the r-sig-... mailing lists. Maybe a slight reduction can also be a motivation for more people to step in again answering questions. Thomas Am 23.01.2016 um 13:28 schrieb Jean-Luc Dupouey:> Dear members, > > Not a technical question: > > The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of > increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, passing > from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. The trend > is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project. I > cannot imagine the total number of R-related inquiries on the Internet > decreased. It means that contributors have gone elsewhere. Indeed, in > the meantime, the number of R posts on stackoverflow passed from 2K to > 100K between 2009 and 2015. Thus my question: what are the > specificities, the plus and minus of the R-project mailing lists, in > comparison with other lists, and especially in comparison with > stackoverflow? A lot of threads are duplicated on both lists, which > seems to me a little bit counterproductive. > > I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, > > Jean-Luc Dupouey > > ______________________________________________ > R-help at r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
On 23/01/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote:> Dear members, > > Not a technical question: > > The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of > increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, passing > from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. The trend > is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project. I > cannot imagine the total number of R-related inquiries on the Internet > decreased. It means that contributors have gone elsewhere. Indeed, in > the meantime, the number of R posts on stackoverflow passed from 2K to > 100K between 2009 and 2015. Thus my question: what are the > specificities, the plus and minus of the R-project mailing lists, in > comparison with other lists, and especially in comparison with > stackoverflow? A lot of threads are duplicated on both lists, which > seems to me a little bit counterproductive.I don't see duplication as counterproductive -- some people like one style, some like the other, both will find answers. However, I think there is less duplication than you might think in many areas. Mailing lists are preferable when the people who are good at answering your questions use the mailing lists; Stackoverflow is preferable when the good answers are there. I generally prefer the mailing lists, though I occasionally participate on Stackoverflow. The reasons I prefer them: 1. Permanence. If Stackoverflow shuts down tomorrow, all posts there will likely disappear. There are several locations that archive the mailing list posts. I have local copies of a few thousand posts on my own laptop. 2. Familiarity. I've been using the mailing lists for 20 years, and its easier to continue than to change. If you're more familiar with the Stackoverflow process, you'll probably prefer that. 3. Simplicity. This may be a repeat of 2, but the Stackoverflow distinction between answers and comments, it's gamification (badges, special privileges to high scorers, etc.) just seems unnecessarily ornate. 4. Interaction. The mailing lists are a series of conversations, whereas Stackoverflow is more like Wikipedia, i.e. a joint project to which you can contribute. (Maybe there are conversations on Stackoverflow as well, but I'm not a big enough user to know about them.) If I look at my own recent record, I tend to answer far more questions on the mailing lists, but ask more on Stackoverflow. I think this is due to my original point: the experts in the topics I'm asking about are more likely to be there than here. Duncan Murdoch P.S. Your statistics are a little misleading: you counted threads in one R mailing list in one year, and cumulative questions in all R topics over 7 years in Stackoverflow, so the difference in traffic isn't as large as your numbers look at first glance. However, I think it is true that the mailing list traffic declined and Stackoverflow increased over that period.
On Sat, 23 Jan 2016, Duncan Murdoch wrote:> I don't see duplication as counterproductive -- some people like one style, > some like the other, both will find answers.Duncan, There's another factor to add to your list. Mail lists, such as r-help and the various SIGs _push_ messages to subscribers' mail boxes. Check your mail and the threads can be followed. From the subscriber's perspective it's passive. Web fora require subscribers to _pull_ messages by pointing their browser to that URL, logging in, finding the appropriate forum, and viewing threads.>From the subscriber's perspective it's active.I'm one of the former types of participant. I subscribe to multiple mail lists and review new messages several times a day when time permits or I have another reason to do so. I'm rarely on a web forum because it requires much more time away from business than does a mail list. Just another perspective, Rich
One additional point: On 23/01/2016 8:33 AM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:> distinction between answers and comments, it's gamification (badges,One advantage of Stackoverflow is that you can go back and correct silly errors (like misspelling "its"). Duncan Murdoch
On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote:> Dear members, > > Not a technical question:But one worth raising...> > The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of > increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, passing > from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. The trend > is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project.[snip ...]> > I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, >In addition to the other replies, there is another trend I've seen that has actively worked to suppress discussion on R-help and move it elsewhere. The general things: - R-help was too unwieldy and so it was a good idea to hive-off specialized topics to various sub lists, R-SIG-Mac, R-SIG-Geo, etc. - Many people posted badly-formed questions to R-help, and so it was a good idea to develop and refer to the posting guide to mitigate the number of purely junk postings. <rant> Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: - Is this homework? We don't do homework (sometimes false alarms, where the OP has to reply to say it is not) - Didn't you bother to do your homework, RTFM, or Google? - This is off-topic because XXX (e.g., it is not strictly an R programming question). - You asked about doing XXX, but this is a stupid thing to want to do. - Don't ask here; you need to talk to a statistical consultant. I find this sad in a public mailing list sent to all R-help subscribers and I sometimes cringe when I read replies to people who were actually trying to get help with some R-related problem, but expressed it badly, didn't know exactly what to ask for, or how to format it, or somehow motivated a frequent-replier to publicly dis the OP. On the other hand, I still see a spirit of great generosity among some people who frequently reply to R-help, taking a possibly badly posed or ill-formatted question, and going to some lengths to provide a a helpful answer of some sort. I applaud those who take the time and effort to do this. I use R in a number of my courses, and used to advise students to post to R-help for general programming questions (not just homework) they couldn't solve. I don't do this any more, because several of them reported a negative experience. In contrast, in the Stackexchange model, there are numerous sublists cross-classified by their tags. If I have a specific knitr, ggplot2, LaTeX, or statistical modeling question, I'm now more likely to post it there, and the worst that can happen is that no one "upvotes" it or someone (helpfully) marks it as a duplicate of a similar question. But comments there are not propagated to all subscribers, and those who reply helpfully, can see their solutions accepted or not, or commented on in that specific topic. Perhaps one solution would be to create a new "R-not-help" list where, as in a Monty Python skit, people could be directed there to be insulted and all these unhelpful replies could be sent. A milder alternative is to encourage some R-help subscribers to click the "Don't send" or "Save" button and think better of their replies. </rant> -- Michael Friendly Email: friendly AT yorku DOT ca Professor, Psychology Dept. & Chair, Quantitative Methods York University Voice: 416 736-2100 x66249 Fax: 416 736-5814 4700 Keele Street Web: http://www.datavis.ca Toronto, ONT M3J 1P3 CANADA
I think this mailing list is wonderful and it has helped me a lot. In fact, I am not sure I would be using R today if it was not for this list. Bob On 1/24/2016 4:42 PM, Michael Friendly wrote:> > On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote: >> Dear members, >> >> Not a technical question: > But one worth raising... >> >> The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of >> increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, passing >> from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. The trend >> is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project. > [snip ...] >> >> I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, >> > > In addition to the other replies, there is another trend I've seen that > has actively worked to suppress discussion on R-help and move it > elsewhere. The general things: > - R-help was too unwieldy and so it was a good idea to hive-off > specialized topics to various sub lists, R-SIG-Mac, R-SIG-Geo, > etc. > - Many people posted badly-formed questions to R-help, and so it > was a good idea to develop and refer to the posting guide to mitigate > the number of purely junk postings. > > <rant> > Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that > there are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not > infrequently range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: > > - Is this homework? We don't do homework (sometimes false alarms, > where the OP has to reply to say it is not) > - Didn't you bother to do your homework, RTFM, or Google? > - This is off-topic because XXX (e.g., it is not strictly an R > programming question). > - You asked about doing XXX, but this is a stupid thing > to want to do. > - Don't ask here; you need to talk to a statistical consultant. > > I find this sad in a public mailing list sent to all R-help subscribers > and I sometimes cringe > when I read replies to people who were actually trying to get > help with some R-related problem, but expressed it badly, didn't > know exactly what to ask for, or how to format it, > or somehow motivated a frequent-replier to publicly dis the OP. > > On the other hand, I still see a spirit of great generosity among some > people who frequently reply to R-help, taking a possibly badly posed > or ill-formatted question, and going to some lengths to provide a > a helpful answer of some sort. I applaud those who take the time > and effort to do this. > > I use R in a number of my courses, and used to advise students to > post to R-help for general programming questions (not just homework) > they couldn't solve. I don't do this any more, because several of them > reported a negative experience. > > In contrast, in the Stackexchange model, there are numerous sublists > cross-classified by their tags. If I have a specific knitr, ggplot2, > LaTeX, or statistical modeling question, I'm now more likely to post > it there, and the worst that can happen is that no one "upvotes" it > or someone (helpfully) marks it as a duplicate of a similar question. > But comments there are not propagated to all subscribers, > and those who reply helpfully, can see their solutions accepted or not, > or commented on in that specific topic. > > Perhaps one solution would be to create a new "R-not-help" list where, > as in a Monty Python skit, people could be directed there to be > insulted and all these unhelpful replies could be sent. > > A milder alternative is to encourage some R-help subscribers to click > the "Don't send" or "Save" button and think better of their replies. > </rant> >
I'm glad to see the issue of negative feedback addressed. I can especially relate to the 'cringe' feeling when reading some authoritarian backhand to a new user. We do see a number of obviously inappropriate or overly lazy postings, but I encounter far more postings where I don't feel competent to judge their merit. It might be better to simply disregard a posting one does not like for some reason. It might also be worthwhile to actively counter negative feedback when we experience that 'cringing' moment. I'm not thinking to foster contention, but simply to provide some tangible reassurance to new users, and not just the ones invoking the negative feedback, that a particular respondent may not represent the perspective of the list. -----Original Message----- From: R-help [mailto:r-help-bounces at r-project.org] On Behalf Of Michael Friendly Sent: January 24, 2016 5:43 PM To: Jean-Luc Dupouey; r-help at r-project.org Subject: Re: [R] R-help mailing list activity / R-not-help? On 1/23/2016 7:28 AM, Jean-Luc Dupouey wrote:> Dear members, > > Not a technical question:But one worth raising...> > The number of threads in this mailing list, following a long period of > increase, has been regularly and strongly decreasing since 2010, > passing from more than 40K threads to less than 11K threads last year. > The trend is similar for most of the "ancient" mailing lists of the R-project.[snip ...]> > I hope it is the wright place to ask this question. Thanks in advance, >In addition to the other replies, there is another trend I've seen that has actively worked to suppress discussion on R-help and move it elsewhere. The general things: - R-help was too unwieldy and so it was a good idea to hive-off specialized topics to various sub lists, R-SIG-Mac, R-SIG-Geo, etc. - Many people posted badly-formed questions to R-help, and so it was a good idea to develop and refer to the posting guide to mitigate the number of purely junk postings. <rant> Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there are many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently range from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile: - Is this homework? We don't do homework (sometimes false alarms, where the OP has to reply to say it is not) - Didn't you bother to do your homework, RTFM, or Google? - This is off-topic because XXX (e.g., it is not strictly an R programming question). - You asked about doing XXX, but this is a stupid thing to want to do. - Don't ask here; you need to talk to a statistical consultant. I find this sad in a public mailing list sent to all R-help subscribers and I sometimes cringe when I read replies to people who were actually trying to get help with some R-related problem, but expressed it badly, didn't know exactly what to ask for, or how to format it, or somehow motivated a frequent-replier to publicly dis the OP. On the other hand, I still see a spirit of great generosity among some people who frequently reply to R-help, taking a possibly badly posed or ill-formatted question, and going to some lengths to provide a a helpful answer of some sort. I applaud those who take the time and effort to do this. I use R in a number of my courses, and used to advise students to post to R-help for general programming questions (not just homework) they couldn't solve. I don't do this any more, because several of them reported a negative experience. In contrast, in the Stackexchange model, there are numerous sublists cross-classified by their tags. If I have a specific knitr, ggplot2, LaTeX, or statistical modeling question, I'm now more likely to post it there, and the worst that can happen is that no one "upvotes" it or someone (helpfully) marks it as a duplicate of a similar question. But comments there are not propagated to all subscribers, and those who reply helpfully, can see their solutions accepted or not, or commented on in that specific topic. Perhaps one solution would be to create a new "R-not-help" list where, as in a Monty Python skit, people could be directed there to be insulted and all these unhelpful replies could be sent. A milder alternative is to encourage some R-help subscribers to click the "Don't send" or "Save" button and think better of their replies. </rant> -- Michael Friendly Email: friendly AT yorku DOT ca Professor, Psychology Dept. & Chair, Quantitative Methods York University Voice: 416 736-2100 x66249 Fax: 416 736-5814 4700 Keele Street Web: http://www.datavis.ca Toronto, ONT M3J 1P3 CANADA ______________________________________________ R-help at r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
> Yet, the trend I've seen is one of increasing **R-not-help**, in that there are > many posts, often by new R users who get replies that not infrequently range > from just mildly off-putting to actively hostile:Slightly surprised that in a debate postulated on increasing 'meanness', no-one has yet pointed to Trey Causey's analysis of R-help's alleged meanness at http://badhessian.org/2013/04/has-r-help-gotten-meaner-over-time-and-what-does-mancur-olson-have-to-say-about-it/ Up to 2013, it was apparently getting _less_ 'mean', not more. S Ellison ******************************************************************* This email and any attachments are confidential. Any use...{{dropped:8}}