| Date: | Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:46:10 -0700 |
|---|
| Reply-To: | Jack Hamilton <jfh@STANFORDALUMNI.ORG> |
|---|
| Sender: | "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> |
|---|
| From: | Jack Hamilton <jfh@STANFORDALUMNI.ORG> |
|---|
| Subject: | Re: SAS Institute to invest upto $20 m with R Project |
|---|
|
| In-Reply-To: | <23845352.1238608549428.JavaMail.root@mswamui-bichon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> |
|---|
| Content-Type: | text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes |
|---|
On Apr 1, 2009, at 10:55 am, Peter Flom wrote:
> Arthur Tabachneck <art297@NETSCAPE.NET> wrote
>> Alex,
>>
>> Even though this thread has already gone well into the Friday Humor
>> zone,
>> its still April Fool's Day in both Europe and North America, and I
>> personally agree with the results of this year's SAS-L vote, I'm
>> still
>> going to use it to address your comment on SAS-L MVS voting.
>>
>> We get to nominate and elect anyone we so choose, without
>> justification,
>> but the operative term is 'we.'
>>
>> As you and I both heard at this year's SAS-L BOF, only around 30 of
>> us
>> bothered to vote in this year's SAS-L election in spite of the fact
>> that
>> it was open to anyone who cared to vote.
>>
>> I would hope that those who either read or post on the list, but
>> haven't
>> voted in the past, don't allow the commendation to become a travesty.
>>
>> Art
>
>
> I think there are a couple of issues here.
>
> First, many of the most prolific and helpful SAS-Lers are already in
> the hall of fame
> and thus ineligible.
You can vote for me next year - I'm still eligible.
--
Jack Hamilton
jfh@alumni.stanford.org
Videtis illam spirare libertatis auram
> I can appreciate that .... the same couple people winning year after
> year would be dull..... But, given how MANY people are now in the H
> of F, and still active here,
> it might be good to make it 3 categories:
> Masters, rookies, and .... well, some category for the rest of us.
>
> This might spark additional interest in the voting, too.
>
> Second, I read all or nearly all of the statistics posts, but
> on other topics, I read relatively little There is certainly some
> overlap between
> the statistics posters and everyone else, but there are also quite a
> few people
> who mostly post about statistics. I imagine that many readers only
> read certrain
> topics. This makes it hard to vote and nominate
>
> Peter
>
> I am not qualified to say whose posts on other topics are good or bad.
>
> Peter L. Flom, PhD
> Statistical Consultant
> www DOT peterflomconsulting DOT com
|
