From dave at kanecap.com  Mon Aug 28 17:48:47 2006
From: dave at kanecap.com (David Kane)
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:48:47 -0400
Subject: [Rd] Affiliation Reporting Standards. was: Re: reshape scaling with
	large numbers of times/rows
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608240959560.3740@gannet.stats.ox.ac.uk>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608240959560.3740@gannet.stats.ox.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <17651.4191.973934.639033@gargle.gargle.HOWL>

After a question on R, Prof Brian Ripley writes:
 > However, you did not give your affiliation and I do not like giving free 
 > consultancy to undisclosed commercial organizations.  Please in future use 
 > a proper signature block so that helpers are aware of your provenance.

I have one question and one comment.

Question: Are there specific standards about this for R mailing lists?
I could not find any. I don't think that there should be because, in
the context of a mailing list question (as opposed to a personal
e-mail), the person's "affiliation" does not strike me as relevant
(although Professor Ripley is free to use whatever criteria he likes
for deciding which questions he answers).

Comment: Does it make much sense to harp on a "commercial" versus
non-commercial motivation in the context of an R mailing list? I think
it makes no sense. I (like many other R users) have both commercial
and university affiliations. Are mailing list participants more
willing to answer my questions if I sign them:

-- 
David Kane
CEO
Kane Capital Management

versus

--
David Kane
Institute Fellow at IQSS
Harvard University

Moreover, just because I sign a message with a university signature
does not mean that I am using the information for academic research
just as a commercial signature does not imply the opposite. My
colleagues and I have asked many questions --- and thanks for all the
great answers! --- relating to out portfolio package, now
open-sourced.

This is also true of "full-time" academics, many of whom do extensive
consulting. Just because an academic asks a question does not mean
that the answer won't be used solely for an "undisclosed commercial
organizations," or should such questions be openly labelled as such?

Perhaps I am missing something. But the
current-standard-as-I-understand-it (use whatever signature you like)
seems perfectly fine. If R-core wants a different standard, I would,
of course, comply.

Dave

--
Dave Kane
Whatever-Affiliation-You-Want-Here




[Rd] Affiliation Reporting Standards. was: Re: reshape scaling with large numbers of times/rows
David Kane