Forum research

[DianaS]

I have just received a PM from El Salsero Gringo and wasn't aware that our forum was being used for research purposes. I have copied my response to his enquiry below, for your information (sorry Franck I know this may cause a stink, but I don't feel that I can keep quiet here ). Can I ask what other peoples views are?

Originally Posted by El Salsero Gringo

Dear friend,

I am conducting some research on the Forum with a view to indentifying how well it acts as a snapshot of the 'average' MJ'ers opinion on a range of topics. Obviously this is something we can all have an opinion about, but some hard data would be useful I feel.

You have been identified as one of the top (elite?) few posters according to the criteria I have used - and I would now like to include the quantity of your contributions in one of two categories - 'Average', or 'non-Average'.

in 'category 1' I am including Venue owners, franchisees, teachers, taxi-dancers, DJ's, promoters, commercial Forum members or anyone with a remote connection to running a venue or dance company - and also anyone who has four or more years of dance (not necessarily MJ) experience.

in 'category 2' I include everyone else.

I would be very grateful if you could confirm for me the two following things:

In which category you see yourself (let us call them 1 or 2)

That you have no objection to your name featuring on the list. (If you do have an objection please still tell me which category you fit into, but your name will be replaced with Anon)

I should also add that unless you have an affiliation listed in your Forum profile, the default category is '2' unless you let me know to place you otherwise!

Many thanks

-ESG

My resposnse to El Gringo cc'd to Franck
I suppose you have had one of these emails!

I'm unsure whether you were approached for consent or what your position is here but I 'm summarising my thoughts for you below.
It is good manners and ethical to approach the list owner to ask permission to conduct research prior to starting. It is also ethical to advise people that the forum is being used for research purposes by an email and also to continuously restate this during the course of the research until the research has been completed.
This ensures that people are aware and that by continuing to contribute to the forum they consent to their comments which are in a public space being used in this context. The forum however is not a public space. It is for use by MJers who are registered. I object to being approached in this manner and will place this message in the sphere of forumites to register my objections publically!
Research has to be conducted within an ethical framework and I would like to have further information regarding the time frame, purpose and nature of this research, including possible publications and the names of supervisors of regulatory bodies. Some researchers do use this lurk and capture method, so not to prejuduce their findings however this method is not one I am personally comfortable with and I am not happy for my contributions to be used in this context.

What a cheek! We are not a zoo..
and this seems like very poorly supervised research.

[azande]

Originally Posted by DianaS

snip

Haven't received anything (obviously with only 300 post I'm not elite!! ) but

[Graham]

Originally Posted by azande

obviously with only 300 post I'm not elite!!

How do you know it was number of posts which dominated his criteria? It might have been good looks, charm, or dancing ability.



(Yes, I did receive one as it happens )

[azande]

Originally Posted by Graham

How do you know it was number of posts which dominated his criteria? It might have been good looks, charm, or dancing ability.



(Yes, I did receive one as it happens )

wher it says....
You have been identified as one of the top (elite?) few posters

and I'm not disputing DianaS good looks, charm, or dancing ability.

[stewart38]

Now its in the public domain thats fine

[philsmove]

Originally Posted by Graham

How do you know it was number of posts which dominated his criteria? It might have been good looks, charm, or dancing ability.



(Yes, I did receive one as it happens )

I got one too _ so good looks, charm, and dancing ability are clearly the criteria

[Gadget]

{my reply to the PM...}

Originally Posted by El Salsero Gringo

I am conducting some research on the Forum with a view to indentifying how well it acts as a snapshot of the 'average' MJ'ers opinion on a range of topics.

This has been discussed before, on many an occasion: what you will find is that most folk who are on here are ones with a passion for MJ - these folk tend to be more advanced than average and have been doing it long enough to form an opinion. Obviously, there is a high proportion of commercial opperators because to become one, you have to have a passion for MJ in the first place!

Those with a passion are also more likley to enter competitions, so you will also find that the cross section of the MJ community is not well balanced in this area either.

You have been identified as one of the top (elite?) few posters according to the criteria I have used - and I would now like to include the quantity of your contributions in one of two categories - 'Average', or 'non-Average'.

I would hope that everyone's contribution is based on it's own merrits: I have seen some sparkling insights from folk who post mainly drivel, and some real drivel from folk who are normally quite lucid and informative.
"Elite" I would dispute - in fact I would condone the whole thing of trying to cattegorise people - it leads to segregation, division and an "us vs them" philosophy that is detrimental to the whole forum community.

That you have no objection to your name featuring on the list. (If you do have an objection please still tell me which category you fit into, but your name will be replaced with Anon

I have every objection to anyone's name being on any list. If you are curious about the quality of postings: that's what the "rep" system is an indication of. If you are curious about the commercial operators: that's why they are in italics.

In summary: the forum is not a balanced representation of the MJ community, however they all have the community at heart and are generally thinking on serving it rather than themselves.

[DianaS]

think I'll add
But "don't quote me on this" to my signature!
Sorted!

If you don't agree to your stuff being used just add a signature! THat will clarify things!

[Minnie M]

Originally Posted by DianaS

I have just received a PM from El Salsero Gringo and wasn't aware that our forum was being used for research purposes ........../snip/......What a cheek! We are not a zoo ..:

Only good thing about it - I AM ELITE !!! (You have been identified as one of the top (elite?)) however

I am not a number I am real MOUSE

[azande]

Originally Posted by DianaS

This message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and permission is not given to quote or use the content outside the ceroc scotland forum

That should be added to the terms of use of the forum!

[Lynn]

Originally Posted by Gadget

I have every objection to anyone's name being on any list.

Though as this was sent via PM and people will reply via PM - each person can decide if they want to be on a list or not.

And 'top' probably refers to either number of posts, rep or a combination of both. (I thought the 'elite' was a bit tongue in cheek as there was a ? after it, rather than actually a 'quality' description.)

[stewart38]

Originally Posted by Lynn

Though as this was sent via PM and people will reply via PM - each person can decide if they want to be on a list or not.

I dont think i was given that option

[El Salsero Gringo]

In light of the fact that this matter is already in the public domain, I think it might clear up any misunderstandings if I post a PM I have just sent to Diana and by cc to Franck, in response to the one from her that begins this thread:




Hello Diana (and cc to Franck too.)

Thanks for your response. I suspect that if I give you some more details of what I have done and what I hope to do that will allay many of your concerns, and we can then address (with Franck and any other interested people) whether I should continue or not.

My intention is to start a new thread to discuss whether the forum is representative of the MJ 'average customer' . It's very easy to have an opinion on the matter but I wanted to provide a little data to base an opinion on.

I have surveyed, (by computer, but could have done it by hand) the 100 most recently updated threads in the "Let's talk about dance" forum. I have counted the number of contributions by each contributor. This is all information that is available not only to each forum member - but to the general public - since that forum is open. (Indeed, Diana, if you go to www.google.com and search for the two words DianaS and Ceroc you may get a surprise...)

I note that of the 4192 postings included, 75% come from just 50 contributors - each of whom I have asked by PM to tell me in which of the two categories in my email they consider themselves.

It was my original intention, depending on whether people wished for anonymity, to publish the data as to whether most posts came from people who were simply, and by their own admission, more 'connected' to MJ than the average customer.

No one is obliged to answer either question that I asked, and it was always foremost in my mind that without explicit permission to include the name I should not do so - despite, as I say, the information already being in the public domain.

I have no formal qualifications in statistics, research - other than a scientific background (nor any interest in statistics outside this Forum) and I totally agree it would be quite improper to use the Forum for any purpose other than to provide some interesting data for other forum members.)

Could I ask you (and Franck, although at the time of writing I've not heard from him) to consider your opposition in the light of this information and let me know your position?

Best wishes

ESG



With this information, perhaps anyone with a continuing objection would wish to comment further? Or I am happy to be PM'd privately if they prefer.

I should add, that the vast majority of the responses I have received so far have been enthusiastically positive to the inclusion of names.

[Northants Girly]

Sure Stewart it IS a PUBLIC forum but . . . .

Originally Posted by Lynn

Though as this was sent via PM and people will reply via PM - each person can decide if they want to be on a list or not.

[David Franklin]

Originally Posted by El Salsero Gringo

I have surveyed, (by computer, but could have done it by hand) the 100 most recently updated threads in the "Let's talk about dance" forum. I have counted the number of contributions by each contributor. This is all information that is available not only to each forum member - but to the general public - since that forum is open. (Indeed, Diana, if you go to www.google.com and search for the two words DianaS and Ceroc you may get a surprise...)

The line where 'data mining' becomes unacceptably intrusive will vary depending on the individual. Personally, at the point where I get PM'd because of it, you've crossed the line.

I should add, that the vast majority of the responses I have received so far have been enthusiastically positive to the inclusion of names.

Given the responses on this thread, that should probably tell you something about the validity of your survey...

Dave

[drathzel]

Originally Posted by Graham

How do you know it was number of posts which dominated his criteria? It might have been good looks, charm, or dancing ability.



(Yes, I did receive one as it happens )

Naw.... I recieved one too!

[TheTramp]

I responded. It took a minute to scan the PM, and about the same to succinctly reply.

It wasn't really asking anything that anyone who's been on here for more than 5 seconds didn't know about me anyhow.

I didn't really find it particularly obtrusive.

I'm really quite laid back.

[Northants Girly]

Originally Posted by TheTramp

I responded. It took a minute to scan the PM, and about the same to succinctly reply.

It wasn't really asking anything that anyone who's been on here for more than 5 seconds didn't know about me anyhow.

I didn't really find it particularly obtrusive.

I'm really quite laid back.

It dosn't take much to wind some folk on on here though


So you got one too eh Trampy?

That throws a spanner in the works then as far as possible selection criteria are concerned

[El Salsero Gringo]

Sorry to be so dull, but the selection criteria were simply the 50 most prolific (read: mouthy) posters in the 100 most recently updated threads in the 'Let's talk about dance' forum.

Actually, I think you're all gorgeous.