Earlier today I asked a question (Mixed Effects Models) and received a response. I want to post follow-up question that asks for R code to achieve the solution provided by the response, but is this type of solicitation appropriate for this site, or better left to stackoverflow?
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
4
-
$\begingroup$ Is there any reason you are using google's service to provide links to the qn? Ideally, you should simply link to the question directly using the editor provided. $\endgroup$– svadaliAug 13, 2010 at 17:51
-
$\begingroup$ Ah, I use it simply because the urls here are rather long and I know some dislike long urls that break up text. Has url shortening already been meta-decided as bad? If so let me know and I'll expand all the links. $\endgroup$– Mike LawrenceAug 13, 2010 at 17:54
-
1$\begingroup$ See my edit to see how you need not use long urls. $\endgroup$– svadaliAug 13, 2010 at 17:58
-
$\begingroup$ Ah, you know I hadn't seen the link function in the editor. I'm too used to plain-text! Fixed in my other post now too. $\endgroup$– Mike LawrenceAug 13, 2010 at 18:08
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
IMHO, asking for full fledged R code for your context is inappropriate. The ideal statistical computing question would be something along the following lines:
- Explain model context / your goals etc
- Give some minimal example of R code that you are having trouble with
- Ask your question about the code (e.g., bugs, slow code etc that you have)
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
Your question on Mixed effects models is fine. As for a follow-up question it would be OK to ask what R packages are available to fit your model. More than likely, someone would post some code that you could use.
When a questionnaire asks for a fully worked solution the OP can come across a bit lazy.
