R help - Mar 2013 - SAS and R complement each other

I'm not sure why you posted the original note.  I quit using SAS in 1991 and
haven't needed it yet.
Frank

RogerJDeAngelis wrote
> Sorry about the double post. But I keep getting 'post' rejections,
so I
> resubmitted about an hour later.




-----
Frank Harrell
Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University
--
View this message in context:
http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/SAS-and-R-complement-each-other-tp4660157p4660190.html
Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

I never saw the "original note" nor its resubmission.  Nor could I
find it
in the R-help archives.

Is it just me?

Not that it really matters a damn --- I don't use SAS either --- I'm
just
curious, and find the situation mysterious.

     cheers,

         Rolf

On 03/04/2013 04:32 PM, Frank Harrell wrote:
> I'm not sure why you posted the original note.  I quit using SAS in
1991 and
> haven't needed it yet.
> Frank
>
> RogerJDeAngelis wrote
>> Sorry about the double post. But I keep getting 'post'
rejections, so I
>> resubmitted about an hour later.

On Mar 4, 2013, at 12:18 PM, Peter Ehlers wrote:
> On 2013-03-04 12:04, Ista Zahn wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Rolf Turner <rolf.turner at
xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I never saw the "original note" nor its resubmission. 
Nor could I find it
>>> in the R-help archives.
>>> 
>>> Is it just me?
>> 
>> No, same here.
> 
> Think Nabble!!!
> (where there are often waits for approval)
"Think Nabble" is correct, however, that wait will take infinite time
on some posts. There is now an automatic censoring process for Nabble posts that
resemble the signatures of prior spambot attacks on Rhelp. It was known that
some innocent posts would be affected, including, unfortunately, some of the
posts from our most valued members if they happen to be posting from Nabble at
the time.  This eventuality was noted when those filters were installed. In this
case Frank saw it on Nabble and gave a perfectly valid reply that was not
censored.

The moderation queue was getting 20 or thirty postings that on cursory review
were valid, but which turned out on investigation to be duplicates of prior
Nabble-mediated posts and the only new content was bogus advertising. The 
moderators were not volunteering to do investigation of all such posts.

-- 
David Winsemius
Alameda, CA, USA