Hi All,
On Friday 7th April John McClure, the allstat list-owner, posted a message to the list reminding subscribers of what constitutes an appropriate contribution to the list. In particular, we were reminded that allstat is not a discussion list.
This is a topic that is periodically aired. Whilst I understand the reasoning behind the statement, I personally have never been in total sympathy with it, particularly as it seems to conflict with the aim of the original "statlist" - allstat's "parent" list that David Kerridge set up at Aberdeen in the late '80s. However I and, I suspect, others find allstat such a useful resource and appreciate so much the efforts of those that maintain it that I have refrained from adding my voice to those arguing that its remit be widened.
On the last (?) occasion that the appropriate use of allstat became a (brief!) discussion issue Matt Whiley (the then allstat listowner) and Adrian Bowman (then on the CTI Statistics Executive, now on the LTSN Maths, Stats & OR Executive) sent a message to the list (19th November 1999, Subject: The Future of Allstat). This message requested that the discussion on the future of allstat be postponed until the changeover from CTI to LTSN early in the year 2000; this (they argued) would be a natural point for a review of allstat to take place. It is now nearly 5 months since that message and over 3 months since Maths, Stats & OR came into existence. The question which virtually asks itself is whether the time to discuss the future of allstat has in fact now arrived?
Best wishes, Paddy
--
Paddy Riley, Statistician,
Academic Computing Services,Cripps Computing Centre,
University of Nottingham, UK
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
Phone: +44 115 951 3350 Fax: +44 115 951 3353
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|