Mathematica problem - generate filename automatically
Dave (from the UK)
(its just an x and a y pair on the same line). The following works
data=Import["somefile.txt", "Table"]
ListPlot[data,PlotLabel->" Ref 4A, 461 MHz, 10 to 20 deg"]
But there are lots of files and it would be tedious to do this manually.
I would like to generate the filenames in Mathematica, then use the
Import command to read the data from these dynamically generated filenames.
The file names consist of
i) A two letter reference (ref=4A, 5C or 5D)
ii) Lower case letter f
iii) 3 or 4 digit integer (freq=461, 767, 1234 or 4554)
iv) the letter 'l'
v) A number n1 which is either 00, 10, 20, 30 or 80
vi) A number n2 10, 20, ..90
I could easily create 4 lists
ref={4A, 5C or 5D}
freq={461, 767, 1234 or 4554}
n1={00, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80}
n2={10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90}
But how can I best combine those lists, so it creates a file name?
The following are some example file names,
4Af461l00u10.txt (ref 4A, 461 MHz, 0 to 10 degrees)
4Af461l10u20.txt (ref 4A, 461 MHz, 10 to 10 degrees)
4Af461l20u30.txt (ref 4A, 461 MHz, 20 to 30 degrees)
4Af461l30u40.txt etc ctc
4Af461l40u50.txt
4Af461l50u60.txt
4Af461l60u70.txt
4Af461l70u80.txt
4Af461l80u90.txt
5Cf461l00u10.txt
5Cf461l10u20.txt
5Cf461l20u30.txt
5Cf461l30u40.txt (ref 5C, 461 MHz, 30 to 40 degrees)
5Cf461l40u50.txt
How can I best generate the file names? I wish to be able to use the
numbers/reference in the PlotLabel too. i.e. if the file name has a
reference of 4A and is data at 461 MHz between 30 and 40 degrees, then
that needs to go into the plot lable.
I'm tempted to write a C program to generate the Mathematica commands,
but I'm sure it must be possible to do this in Mathematica - I just know
C better!
Any help appreciated.
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: month...@althorne.org
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.
http://chessdb.sourceforge.net/ - a Free open-source Chess Database
Bhuvanesh
In[1]:= ref = {"4A", "5C", "5D"};
In[2]:= freq = {"461", "767", "1234", "4554"};
In[3]:= n1 = {"00", "10", "20", "30", "40", "50", "60", "70", "80"};
In[4]:= n2 = {"10", "20", "30", "40", "50", "60", "70", "80", "90"};
In[5]:= filenames = Flatten[Outer[StringJoin[#1,"f",#2,"l",#3,"u",#4,".txt"]&, ref, freq, n1, n2], 3];
(* Check that we have the expected number of filenames *)
In[6]:= Length[filenames] == 3*4*9*9
Out[6]= True
(* Show the first few *)
In[7]:= Take[filenames, 3] //InputForm
Out[7]//InputForm=
{"4Af461l00u10.txt", "4Af461l00u20.txt", "4Af461l00u30.txt"}
After that,
Map[(data = Import[#, "Table"]; ListPlot[data, PlotLabel->#])&, filenames]
Bhuvanesh,
Wolfram Research
P.S.: This question really should go to the Mathematica newsgroup (MathGroup): http://forums.wolfram.com/mathgroup
Dave (from the UK)
> Some variation of the following should do the trick:
>
> In[1]:= ref = {"4A", "5C", "5D"};
>
> In[2]:= freq = {"461", "767", "1234", "4554"};
>
> In[3]:= n1 = {"00", "10", "20", "30", "40", "50", "60", "70", "80"};
>
> In[4]:= n2 = {"10", "20", "30", "40", "50", "60", "70", "80", "90"};
I should have said, that n2 is always more 10 more than n1. This is
relevant, as your solution generates names like 5Df4554l50u90.txt which
implies data covers the range 50 to 90 degrees. In practice, that is not
so.
> In[5]:= filenames = Flatten[Outer[StringJoin[#1,"f",#2,"l",#3,"u",#4,".txt"]&, ref, freq, n1, n2], 3];
>
> (* Check that we have the expected number of filenames *)
>
> In[6]:= Length[filenames] == 3*4*9*9
>
> Out[6]= True
>
> (* Show the first few *)
>
> In[7]:= Take[filenames, 3] //InputForm
>
> Out[7]//InputForm=
> {"4Af461l00u10.txt", "4Af461l00u20.txt", "4Af461l00u30.txt"}
>
> After that,
>
> Map[(data = Import[#, "Table"]; ListPlot[data, PlotLabel->#])&, filenames]
Is it possible for the PlotLabel to be a be a bit more sophisticated
than simply the name of the file. I want a typical PlotLabel to be
"Ref 4A, 1234 MHz, 10\[Degree] to 20\[Degree]"
rather than the just the file name.
> Bhuvanesh,
> Wolfram Research
Thank you Bhuvanesh
>
> P.S.: This question really should go to the Mathematica newsgroup (MathGroup): http://forums.wolfram.com/mathgroup
I am aware of that, but I have over the years become very disillusioned
with that resource - in particular the moderated newsgroup
comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica
i) Moderation means getting responses can be slow. I often find posting
to newsgroups brings solutions in an hour or less, but its not unknown
for one to have to wait ages for a post to appear if sent to
comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica
This problem is probably somewhat worst for me, as I'm in Europe with a
timezone very different from that of the moderator.
ii) Steve (the moderator) seems to object if I post from an obviously
phony email address, despite the fact the question is sensible.
iii) Sending to the newsgroup sometimes results in one receiving a
response directly from Wolfram Research before it even appears on the
list. i.e. too much censorship I feel.
iv) Some things, which I feel would be useful, appear to be banned
topics. This is as topic I posted some time back with the title "
University License fees are short sighted of Wolfram Research
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/sci.math.symbolic/tree/browse_frm/thread/a7777ed653566861
was not permitted. I posted it here, and got some useful feedback - not
only on the newsgroup, but by private emails to/from Wolfram.
v) If one attempts to cross-post to sci.math.symbolic and
comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica, then it does not appear on
sci.math.symbolic until/if Steve permits it on
comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica. That is the nature of how newsgroups
work. So I dont even tend to cross post now.
Overall, I don't like the degree of censorship. There are Matlab and
Maple newsgroups which are unmoderated and work well in my opinion.
Nasser Abbasi
I also do not like the delay in exchanges at the math group.
I really, really, think that the Mathematica newsgroup being moderated and
SLOW, is HURTING Mathematica, not helping it.
It hurts Mathematica because many students and others who might be curious
about it, and who start to use it, and need help, they need help quickly,
and when they find they can get an answer from say Matlab newgroup or Maple
in few minutes, and it takes 2-3 days to get an answer from the Math group,
then they have to wait another 2-3 days to get a another response for a
follow up, etc.. many actually will drop Mathematica and go back to Matlab.
This is something that WRI do not seem to think about. The more WRI makes
it harder for people to discuss Mathematica, the less they will be
interested in it, so you will get what you asked for.
Look at that Matlab newsgroup, and compare it to the Math group. Matlab
newsgroup is 100 (1000?) times more active. Having un-moderated Matlab
newsgroup does not seem to have hurt Matlab nor Mathworks. No wonder Matlab
at schools is also used so much more than Mathematica.
I myself, many times, would have something to say and contribute to the
Mathgroup, but then won't bother. Not interested in talking with an echo
that lasts 2 days. Imagine being in a technical conversation with someone
where you have to wait 2 days for a reply each time. Not a very interesting
or useful discussion I would think. I think it a boring discussion.
Sometimes I think they have that group moderated just for one reason, to
prevent our own Vladimir from posting Mathematica bugs there :)
Nasser
Jean-Marc Gulliet
> Bhuvanesh wrote:
<snip>
>> Map[(data = Import[#, "Table"]; ListPlot[data, PlotLabel->#])&,
>> filenames]
>
> Is it possible for the PlotLabel to be a be a bit more sophisticated
> than simply the name of the file. I want a typical PlotLabel to be
>
> "Ref 4A, 1234 MHz, 10\[Degree] to 20\[Degree]"
>
> rather than the just the file name.
<snip>
Sure it can. Mathematica has a large set of string manipulation
functions. See
<http://reference.wolfram.com/mathematica/guide/StringManipulation.html>
For instance,
In[1]:= StringJoin["Ref ", StringTake[#, 2], ", ",
StringTake[#, {4, 7}], " MHz, ",
ToString[ToExpression[StringTake[#, {8, 9}]]], "\[Degree] to ",
StringTake[#, {11, 12}], "\[Degree]"] & /@ {"4Af461l00u10.txt",
"4Af461l00u20.txt", "4Af461l00u30.txt"}
Out[1]= {"Ref 4A, 461l MHz, 0\[Degree] to 10\[Degree]", "Ref 4A, 461l
MHz, 0\[Degree] to 20\[Degree]", "Ref 4A, 461l MHz, 0\[Degree] to
30\[Degree]"}
(Note that the ASCII string "\[Degree" will display as the degree
character when evaluated or pasted in a Mathematica notebook.)
Regards,
--
Jean-Marc
Daniel Lichtblau
below.com> wrote:
> Bhuvanesh wrote:
[...]
> > P.S.: This question really should go to the Mathematica newsgroup (MathGroup):http://forums.wolfram.com/mathgroup
>
> I am aware of that, but I have over the years become very disillusioned
> with that resource - in particular the moderated newsgroup
> comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica
>
> i) Moderation means getting responses can be slow. I often find posting
> to newsgroups brings solutions in an hour or less, but its not unknown
> for one to have to wait ages for a post to appear if sent to
> comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica
This is indeed a drawback to a moderated Usenet group.
> This problem is probably somewhat worst for me, as I'm in Europe with a
> timezone very different from that of the moderator.
>
> ii) Steve (the moderator) seems to object if I post from an obviously
> phony email address, despite the fact the question is sensible.
I do not know the specifics of this. My guess is he requires valid
addresses to help keep down the level of spam and crankery. Possibly
he does not fully read the posts when the address is invalid.
> iii) Sending to the newsgroup sometimes results in one receiving a
> response directly from Wolfram Research before it even appears on the
> list. i.e. too much censorship I feel.
This is much more likely a case of synchronization than what you
suspect. Messages are sent to us in advance of posting, at the rate of
maybe one per year. And in those rare cases, I'd be surprised if
replies were sent out from Wolfram Research employees in advance of
the message actually appearing.
In contrast, it is quite common to see a lag between messages
appearing in, say, the MathGroup mailing list, and some news browsers.
In such circumstances I can easily see how a reply could reach one via
email before the original post has been seen on such a browser.
> iv) Some things, which I feel would be useful, appear to be banned
> topics. This is as topic I posted some time back with the title "
> University License fees are short sighted of Wolfram Research
>
> http://groups.google.co.uk/group/sci.math.symbolic/tree/browse_frm/th...
>
> was not permitted. I posted it here, and got some useful feedback - not
> only on the newsgroup, but by private emails to/from Wolfram.
All the same, it was deservedly kept off MathGroup.
I too have been known to take a keen interest in university pricing.
That does not make MathGroup an appropriate place for discussion (or,
more correctly, airing of complaints) of the topic.
Me, I'd prefer that more comparison with other software be allowed. It
gives useful information, for one thing. That said, I do not like the
idea that posters might go non-stop in that direction (as happened,
not too long ago, albeit with the other software unnamed). I do not
have a good idea of how/where to draw the line, but that does not mean
it couldn't be done somewhere other than "No explicit mention of other
programs".
> v) If one attempts to cross-post to sci.math.symbolic and
> comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica, then it does not appear on
> sci.math.symbolic until/if Steve permits it on
> comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica. That is the nature of how newsgroups
> work. So I dont even tend to cross post now.
>
> Overall, I don't like the degree of censorship. There are Matlab and
> Maple newsgroups which are unmoderated and work well in my opinion.
>
> --
> Dave (from the UK)
> [...]
They work as well as the collected body of posters. Which is to say,
quite well for one, and not quite as well for the other (if you look
at signal/noise as your primary measure of wellness). In any case,
moderated and unmoderated Usenet groups are different models, with
their various strengths and weaknesses. I myself am quite happy with
the direction MathGroup/comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica went, admitted
drawbacks notwithstanding. But I think regardless of which side one
takes, it should be understood that there are disadvantages to either
model.
Daniel Lichtblau
Wolfram Research
Dave (from the UK)
>>i) Moderation means getting responses can be slow. I often find posting
>>to newsgroups brings solutions in an hour or less, but its not unknown
>>for one to have to wait ages for a post to appear if sent to
>>comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica
>
>
> This is indeed a drawback to a moderated Usenet group.
A pretty BIG drawback too. I cant be bothered to use it (mainly for this
reason).
Nasser Abbasi said on the other thread:
"I myself, many times, would have something to say and contribute to the
Mathgroup, but then won't bother. Not interested in talking with an echo
that lasts 2 days."
So that is two people who rarely use it, but would if there was no
moderation.
>>This problem is probably somewhat worst for me, as I'm in Europe with a
>>timezone very different from that of the moderator.
>>
>>ii) Steve (the moderator) seems to object if I post from an obviously
>>phony email address, despite the fact the question is sensible.
>
>
> I do not know the specifics of this. My guess is he requires valid
> addresses to help keep down the level of spam and crankery. Possibly
> he does not fully read the posts when the address is invalid.
Possibly, but I don't particularly want the spam either!
>>iii) Sending to the newsgroup sometimes results in one receiving a
>>response directly from Wolfram Research before it even appears on the
>>list. i.e. too much censorship I feel.
>
>
> This is much more likely a case of synchronization than what you
> suspect. Messages are sent to us in advance of posting, at the rate of
> maybe one per year. And in those rare cases, I'd be surprised if
> replies were sent out from Wolfram Research employees in advance of
> the message actually appearing.
I cant prove it, but suspect it did happen. I had newsgroup access from
both the uni where I used to work and from home. It's possible both
systems could have had delays I agree.
> All the same, it was deservedly kept off MathGroup.
> I too have been known to take a keen interest in university pricing.
> That does not make MathGroup an appropriate place for discussion (or,
> more correctly, airing of complaints) of the topic.
As I pointed out, I had first raised the issue with Wolfram, but got
nowhere with it. So later posted to a newsgroup. It is highly relavant
to Mathematica.
> Me, I'd prefer that more comparison with other software be allowed. It
> gives useful information, for one thing. That said, I do not like the
> idea that posters might go non-stop in that direction (as happened,
> not too long ago, albeit with the other software unnamed). I do not
> have a good idea of how/where to draw the line, but that does not mean
> it couldn't be done somewhere other than "No explicit mention of other
> programs".
It is censorship.
>>Overall, I don't like the degree of censorship. There are Matlab and
>>Maple newsgroups which are unmoderated and work well in my opinion.
>>
>>--
>>Dave (from the UK)
>>[...]
>
>
> They work as well as the collected body of posters. Which is to say,
> quite well for one, and not quite as well for the other (if you look
> at signal/noise as your primary measure of wellness).
S/N ratio is a good measure, but I am not sure that is the main one.
Speed of response is just as important (if not more so). I would rather
receive a few junk posts and have to filter them myself, than find the
speed is so sloooooow, that I just give up and do not use it.
In any case,
> moderated and unmoderated Usenet groups are different models, with
> their various strengths and weaknesses. I myself am quite happy with
> the direction MathGroup/comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica went, admitted
> drawbacks notwithstanding. But I think regardless of which side one
> takes, it should be understood that there are disadvantages to either
> model.
I agree. Just for me personally, the disadvantages outweigh the
advantages. Seems they do for Nasser Abbasi too.
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
Nasser Abbasi
Daniel;
There is also one very important inefficiency in the Math group:
person A posts a question. Person B sees the question, spends time on it,
and finds an answer, and sends it. But because the answer does not show up
for days, then person C comes in and sees the same question with no answer
yet, and they have no way to find out that an answer is in the queue, so
person C also spends time to help, and sends the answer.
Person D comes in, and does the same, etc....It is like group of people
walking in the dark, no one sees what the other is doing.
Many times, I see the same answer being given by n different people. This
is waste of people's time. On Matlab newsgroup, when I see a question, and I
see a good answer there, then I go on to see if I help someone else who does
not have an answer yet. This way the help gets used where it is useful, and
not wasted. So I think an un-moderated Math group will result in much more
efficient use of resources, and I think it will help Mathematica become much
more popular, and it will result in more people learning more about
Mathematica, becuase more people will be involved in the discussion when
there is no such long delays.
I think everyone will benefit from free and open and unrestricted technical
discussion.
Nasser
Dave (from the UK)
FWIW, I did seriously consider the idea of setting up an unmoderated
Mathematica newsgroup. I posted the idea on here:
back in April 2005. At the request of the group that sets up the
newsgroups, I asked Steve if he would allow
comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica to become unmoderated. Steve replied to
me it would remain moderated.
I tried to post my proposal for
comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica.unmoderated on
comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica, but my post never appeared - I guess it
did not meet the moderators approval!
> I think everyone will benefit from free and open and unrestricted technical
> discussion.
If there was sufficient interest, it may be possible to get
comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica.unmoderated (or whatever a proposer
wanted). But when I muted this before, there was not sufficient interest
. A few people said they would welcome it for Mathematica and one person
thought it would be a good idea, as it would remove traffic from
sci.math.symbolic, although he would not subscribe to it himself.
It was clear there was no way I would have got the support needed, so I
gave up the idea.
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
rjf
There is another possibility, which is to use another newsgroup.
Say,
http://groups.google.com/group/freeMathematica
Such a newsgroup can have a moderator that looks at each message
before posting, or perhaps looks at each poster before the first
posting to make sure it is a real person.
The fact that Matlab and other newsgroups look different is partly due
to the different sizes of the user community, and perhaps the fact
that the capabilities of Mathematica and other CAS are described in
such an open-ended fashion that it virtually invites criticisms that
sometimes amount to ill-informed and "unintentional trolls" if such a
thing can exist.
RJF
Dave (from the UK)
> There is another possibility, which is to use another newsgroup.
> Say,
> http://groups.google.com/group/freeMathematica
My experience of yahoo groups is that they rarely become as effective as
a simple usenet newsgroup.
I think comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica.unmoderated has the most chance
of being successful.
However, I suspect if WRI objected, they could get enough of their staff
to vote against it. It seems we might be stuck with the censorship and
the delays that brings.
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
SzH
> There is another possibility, which is to use another newsgroup.
> Say,http://groups.google.com/group/freeMathematica
I have seen several open Mathematica discussion lists, like
http://groups.google.com/group/mathematica
http://groups.google.com/group/fa.mathematica/
and some web forums. But no one is using them. How would you
persuade people to use them? Mathematica questions are rare even at
sci.math.symbolic.
Dave
different in this respect.
Szabolcs Horvát
> SzH wrote:
>> But no one is using them. How would you
>> persuade people to use them?
>>
> different in this respect.
Dave,
That wasn't really a statement expressing my feelings (and it wasn't an
argument either). It was a practical question. If MathGroup is really
that bad, why don't people use alternative discussion forums?
--
Szabolcs
Dave (from the UK)
> Dave,
>
> That wasn't really a statement expressing my feelings (and it wasn't an
> argument either). It was a practical question. If MathGroup is really
> that bad, why don't people use alternative discussion forums?
>
I think in general newsgroups are more popuar than forums. I use the
Solaris operating system, and know most questions about Solaris apear on
the Sun/Solaris newsgroups - I'm aware of no forum, including those run
by Sun, than get the quantity of questions.
I'm not saying comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica is "really that bad", but
for me personally, it is more hassle than it is worth, which is why I
made the comment when Bhuvanesh from Wolfram Research said "This
question really should go to the Mathematica newsgroup (MathGroup):" I'm
not saying I would never use it again, but it is a last resort for me.
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
Dave (from the UK)
> Because newsgroup is the best and most known place for discussion. There are
> many way to create forums and discussion boards (see Yahoo message boards
> for example, very popular place for discussion).
>
> But most folks prefer newsgroups. So anything else would fail and will not
> attract many people. I myself do not like those closed forums, with login,
> and ad banners everywhere.
Same here. You seem to have a lot in common with me on your preferences
for support!
> Btw, there is the Mathematica-users web site, a wiki based, its been up for
> sometime, but there is hardly any discussion on it
>
> http://www.mathematica-users.org/webMathematica/wiki/wiki.jsp?pageName=Talk:Main_Page
>
> I'd like to suggest the following: set up 2 newsgroups for Mathematica, a
> moderated one and non-moderated one.
I have proposed that idea before.
> There are a number of technical newsgroup with both modes. See physics for
> example, and also Math (research physics and research math are moderated,
> which is fine with me, since there is an un-moderated version)
>
> So why not have such setup for Mathematica? Those who prefer moderated
> discussions can just use the moderated newsgroup, and let those of us who
> enjoy free and speedy discussion use the un-moderated version.
>
> Can we then create a comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica.moderated, and then the
> current one will be the un-moderated version?
There is quite a complex procedure to get a comp.* newsgroup created.
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/creating-newsgroups/part1/
There has to be a Request for Discussion (RFD) posted to news.groups,
plus relevant other groups, such as this one.
It takes several months, and there is no guarantee it would happen. In
fact, I very much doubt it would be possible to get sufficient votes for
it. There has to be a vote, with at least 100 more yes votes than no
votes, and at least 2/3 must be yes votes. I don't think that would happen.
Here is the RFD for comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/news.groups/browse_frm/thread/1d954c9d5f4a7a60/b50086b2f5e44d25?hl=en&lnk=st&q=rfd+comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica&rnum=2#b50086b2f5e44d25
Note the first 5 responses all question the logic of it being moderated.
With 21 people replying, it is hard to see how they got the 100 more
yes than no votes, and the 2/3 majority needed. My guess is Wolfram
employees were encouraged to vote yes, as I am sure they would be
encouraged to vote no for an unmoderated version.
Getting a alt.*.mathematica would be easier, but less effective I think,
as they dont tend to get copied by as many news servers. You have to
post a Request For Discussion (RFD) to related newsgroups.
When I wanted to propose this before, I was advised by one of the
newsgroup mentors (see link above) to first ask the moderator of
comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica if he would make it unmoderated. Steve
sent me an email saying it would remain moderated.
I sent a message to comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica to seek the views of
others. That was censored and never appeared. But my thoughts can be
found on the Google archives of sci.math.symbolic.
I leave it to others to ask why the post was censored on
comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica.
> Where do I go to vote yes? :)
I think to do it properly would be a huge undertaking. If you want to
take it on, you can be certain of a yes vote from me, but I doubt you
would get the number necessary. It would be interesting what would
happen if an RFD was posted on comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica, but that
will not happen.
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
Daniel Lichtblau
[In what follows I use s.m.s. for sci.math.symbolic, and c.s-s.m.m for
comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica. --dl]
On Sep 21, 12:05 pm, "Dave (from the UK)" <see-my-signat...@see-
below.com> wrote:
> Nasser Abbasi wrote:
> > Because newsgroup is the best and most known place for discussion. There are
> > many way to create forums and discussion boards (see Yahoo message boards
> > for example, very popular place for discussion).
>
> > But most folks prefer newsgroups. So anything else would fail and will not
> > attract many people. I myself do not like those closed forums, with login,
> > and ad banners everywhere.
>
> Same here. You seem to have a lot in common with me on your preferences
> for support!
>
> > Btw, there is the Mathematica-users web site, a wiki based, its been up for
> > sometime, but there is hardly any discussion on it
>
> >http://www.mathematica-users.org/webMathematica/wiki/wiki.jsp?pageNam...
>
> > I'd like to suggest the following: set up 2 newsgroups for Mathematica, a
> > moderated one and non-moderated one.
>
> I have proposed that idea before.
>
> > There are a number of technical newsgroup with both modes. See physics for
> > example, and also Math (research physics and research math are moderated,
> > which is fine with me, since there is an un-moderated version)
>
> > So why not have such setup for Mathematica? Those who prefer moderated
> > discussions can just use the moderated newsgroup, and let those of us who
> > enjoy free and speedy discussion use the un-moderated version.
>
> > Can we then create a comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica.moderated, and then the
> > current one will be the un-moderated version?
No. The current one is moderated and will remain that way. If you want
an unmoderated one you can work to have one established. (I realize it
was another poster who raised this particular question.)
> There is quite a complex procedure to get a comp.* newsgroup created.
>
> http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/creating-newsgroups/part1/
>
> There has to be a Request for Discussion (RFD) posted to news.groups,
> plus relevant other groups, such as this one.
>
> It takes several months, and there is no guarantee it would happen. In
> fact, I very much doubt it would be possible to get sufficient votes for
> it. There has to be a vote, with at least 100 more yes votes than no
> votes, and at least 2/3 must be yes votes. I don't think that would happen.
>
> Here is the RFD for comp.soft-sys.math.mathematicahttp://groups.google.co.uk/group/news.groups/browse_frm/thread/1d954c...
>
> Note the first 5 responses all question the logic of it being moderated.
In that thread, there was I think one person (other than the proposer,
Steve Christensen), with any connection to Mathematica. I suspect most
were concerned about the effect such a group would have on
sci.math.symbolic. Me, I thnk that effect has been beneficial because
a lot of Mathematica-specific traffic is now removed from s.m.s.
> With 21 people replying, it is hard to see how they got the 100 more
> yes than no votes, and the 2/3 majority needed.
Hmm. Seemed clear enough to me at the time. Many of us thought it was
a great idea to extend a large and growing email list to Usenet, and
remove superfluous traffic from s.m.s. Not much to say, really. We
just wanted to vote.
> My guess is Wolfram
> employees were encouraged to vote yes, as I am sure they would be
> encouraged to vote no for an unmoderated version.
We were encouraged to vote in favor of c.s-s.m.m. I should emphasize
"encouraged" because I have seen it stated in s.m.s., a few years
back, that this had been an "order".
As for an unmoderated version, I cannot say what, if anything, would
be the company view. I can only say I myself could care less, and
would not vote unless the RFD somehow degenerated into needless
MathGroup bashing.
> Getting a alt.*.mathematica would be easier, but less effective I think,
> as they dont tend to get copied by as many news servers. You have to
> post a Request For Discussion (RFD) to related newsgroups.
>
> When I wanted to propose this before, I was advised by one of the
> newsgroup mentors (see link above) to first ask the moderator of
> comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica if he would make it unmoderated. Steve
> sent me an email saying it would remain moderated.
See below.
> I sent a message to comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica to seek the views of
> others. That was censored and never appeared. But my thoughts can be
> found on the Google archives of sci.math.symbolic.
The charter for c.s-s.m.m is that it is for discussion of technical
questions regarding Mathematica. Not for discussion of Mathematica
discussion venues, or philosophy of moderated Usenet groups, etc. Fond
though you seem to be of the notion that you were censored, the
moderator was well within bounds of the charter in choosing to reject
your post.
It may be the case that many people with an interest in what you
propose are also readers of c.s-s.m.m, and thus your desire to reach
them is understandable. But it is not the role of the moderator to
assist you in that endeavor, given that it falls outside the purview
of the group. More generally, it is not his job to accomodate gripes
of various stripes (though he might choose to do so, on a case-by-case
base).
> http://groups.google.co.uk/group/sci.math.symbolic/browse_frm/thread/...
>
> I leave it to others to ask why the post was censored on
> comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica.
>
> > Where do I go to vote yes? :)
>
> I think to do it properly would be a huge undertaking. If you want to
> take it on, you can be certain of a yes vote from me, but I doubt you
> would get the number necessary. It would be interesting what would
> happen if an RFD was posted on comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica, but that
> will not happen.
If a mathematica-related unmoderated Usenet group is desired, somebody
will need to take steps to obtain it.
> --
> Dave (from the UK)
> [...]
I want to point out something about c.s-s.m.m coming into being (and
remaining) as a moderated forum. It was that way long before it was a
Usenet group. We've been quite happy with the effect of the moderating
(frankly I doubt I'd spend time with it were it otherwise). It simply
went from a growing mailing list to a Usenet group, retaining the same
features it had had for several years as an email list.
This history by the way also accounts in part for the slightly low
level of subscribers one might see in c.s-s.m.m. I checked today and
learned I am not among them. Why? Because I still receive and respond
to that group via email. My guess is that would account for roughly
half or so of the MathGroup/c.s-s.m.m readership.
Daniel Lichtblau
Wolfram Research
Herman Rubin
rjf <fat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>RJF
It looks like this is a case for some form of robomoderation,
or a substantially larger number of moderators.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
Vladimir Bondarenko
NA> I really, really, think that the Mathematica newsgroup
NA> being moderated and SLOW, is HURTING Mathematica, not
NA> helping it.
I fully agree with you.
This is why I decided not to post there any longer.
Best wishes,
Vladimir Bondarenko
VM and GEMM architect
Co-founder, CEO, Mathematical Director
http://www.cybertester.com/ Cyber Tester, LLC
http://maple.bug-list.org/ Maple Bugs Encyclopaedia
http://www.CAS-testing.org/ CAS Testing