2006-2011: Mexican, Argentinian, Brazilian governments distance themselves from freedomdefined 1.0

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
40 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

MZMcBride-2
Guillaume Paumier wrote:
> Le jeudi 10 mars 2011 à 02:00 -0500, MZMcBride a écrit :
>> Apologies for the slew of questions. I skimmed the FAQ, but didn't see any
>> of these answered.
>
> I've added some of these questions to the FAQ page; I cherry-picked
> those that I thought would be really "frequently asked", based on my
> personal experience with Wikimedians.
>
> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Editor_survey_FAQ

Thank you for that. Do you know if there's a reason that Mani isn't able to
respond on this list? (I assume she can post here as it was her e-mail that
I replied to.)

I completely agree that some of my questions weren't of the "frequently
asked" nature, but some of them are very important, in my view. Given some
of the weighty subject matter (regarding user privacy, data retention,
etc.), the answers posted so far at the FAQ page have been pretty
lackluster.

> Questions I left out seemed to be (constructive) feedback rather than
> common questions, so they should probably go on the feedback page:
>
> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Editor_survey_feedback

She asked that she be e-mailed with questions. I cc'd her on the original
e-mail. I'm not sure if it will make a difference, but I can post my
questions on that feedback page as well if you think that will help (I'll do
it in a minute).

After having looked at the survey content, the survey software, and the
survey format (particularly the length), I have very, very low confidence
that anything of value will come from this (beyond lessons of what not to do
next time).

The pool of people who will click the banner is already fairly small. The
people who will want to start a 20-minute survey is even smaller. The pool
of people who will be comfortable answering some of these questions when the
data usage/retention policies are so murky is even smaller. And the people
who will be able to bear LimeSurvey makes the pool even smaller. Even on the
scale of all logged-in users, we're talking about a very small pool of
people and not a particularly representative bunch, in my opinion. It
doesn't seem like many people are interested in discussing this, though, so
I guess we'll just wait and see what happens.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Mani Pande


> MzMcBride wrote:

> "After having looked at the survey content, the survey software, and the
> survey format (particularly the length), I have very, very low confidence
> that anything of value will come from this (beyond lessons of what not to do
> next time)."
>    
Based upon my experience having conducted surveys and quantitative
research for over 12 years, this is a very incorrect assessment of the
survey. The survey answers questions that are important to the
foundation, and will help us understand the editor community so we can
provide them an engaging  editing environment, ensure we can increase
their needs to increase retention and increase the diversity among
editors. As for Lime Survey, it is a great open source tool that is able
to meet all our needs.  Again based upon my experience, a 20 minute
survey is standard for most surveys. A learning from our last survey was
that our community is very engaged and I believe the length of the
survey is the least of our problems.

> The pool of people who will click the banner is already fairly small. The
> people who will want to start a 20-minute survey is even smaller.
>    

When we did UNU-Merit which was a similar length, we got over 100,000
complete responses so your assessment that the pool is fairly small is
unsubstantiated.

If you have more feedback, please post it on the wiki.
Mani


> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>    

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Keegan Peterzell
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 9:57 PM, Mani Pande <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> > MzMcBride wrote:
>
> > "After having looked at the survey content, the survey software, and the
> > survey format (particularly the length), I have very, very low confidence
> > that anything of value will come from this (beyond lessons of what not to
> do
> > next time)."
> >
> Based upon my experience having conducted surveys and quantitative
> research for over 12 years, this is a very incorrect assessment of the
> survey. The survey answers questions that are important to the
> foundation, and will help us understand the editor community so we can
> provide them an engaging  editing environment, ensure we can increase
> their needs to increase retention and increase the diversity among
> editors. As for Lime Survey, it is a great open source tool that is able
> to meet all our needs.  Again based upon my experience, a 20 minute
> survey is standard for most surveys. A learning from our last survey was
> that our community is very engaged and I believe the length of the
> survey is the least of our problems.
>

Boom.


>
> > The pool of people who will click the banner is already fairly small. The
> > people who will want to start a 20-minute survey is even smaller.
> >
>
> When we did UNU-Merit which was a similar length, we got over 100,000
> complete responses so your assessment that the pool is fairly small is
> unsubstantiated.
>

Roasted.


>
> If you have more feedback, please post it on the wiki.
>

Nice.


> Mani
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

I like your style already, Mani.

--
~Keegan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Pronoein
Hello Keegan. I think this list is not about siding and throwing
moqueries at each other. We should respect what each one believes.

Le 11/03/2011 03:29, Keegan Peterzell a écrit :

> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 9:57 PM, Mani Pande <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> MzMcBride wrote:
>>
>>> "After having looked at the survey content, the survey software, and the
>>> survey format (particularly the length), I have very, very low confidence
>>> that anything of value will come from this (beyond lessons of what not to
>> do
>>> next time)."
>>>
>> Based upon my experience having conducted surveys and quantitative
>> research for over 12 years, this is a very incorrect assessment of the
>> survey. The survey answers questions that are important to the
>> foundation, and will help us understand the editor community so we can
>> provide them an engaging  editing environment, ensure we can increase
>> their needs to increase retention and increase the diversity among
>> editors. As for Lime Survey, it is a great open source tool that is able
>> to meet all our needs.  Again based upon my experience, a 20 minute
>> survey is standard for most surveys. A learning from our last survey was
>> that our community is very engaged and I believe the length of the
>> survey is the least of our problems.
>>
>
> Boom.
>
>
>>
>>> The pool of people who will click the banner is already fairly small. The
>>> people who will want to start a 20-minute survey is even smaller.
>>>
>>
>> When we did UNU-Merit which was a similar length, we got over 100,000
>> complete responses so your assessment that the pool is fairly small is
>> unsubstantiated.
>>
>
> Roasted.
>
>
>>
>> If you have more feedback, please post it on the wiki.
>>
>
> Nice.
>
>
>> Mani
>>
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
> I like your style already, Mani.
>


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by Keegan Peterzell
Keegan Peterzell wrote:
>>> The pool of people who will click the banner is already fairly small. The
>>> people who will want to start a 20-minute survey is even smaller.
>>
>> When we did UNU-Merit which was a similar length, we got over 100,000
>> complete responses so your assessment that the pool is fairly small is
>> unsubstantiated.
>
> Roasted.

I spent a bit of time looking into the UNU-Merit survey from 2008 and its
surrounding circumstances. The ball was fumbled at every point along the
way. I think it will be difficult to do worse this time, but it'll take a
while to see how this pans out in order to make a fair comparison of the two
surveys.

I don't believe the raw data was ever made available from the 2008 survey;
<http://www.wikipediasurvey.org/> was the closest thing I could find to any
type of analysis. Keegan, if you have anything worthwhile to provide to this
discussion, please stop holding back.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Pronoein
On 11 March 2011 06:32, Pronoein <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello Keegan. I think this list is not about siding and throwing
> moqueries at each other. We should respect what each one believes.


To have an opinion respected,it helps if that opinion is not both (a)
snide and (b) provably, factually wrong


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Keegan Peterzell
In reply to this post by Pronoein
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 12:32 AM, Pronoein <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello Keegan. I think this list is not about siding and throwing
> moqueries at each other. We should respect what each one believes.
>
>
I wouldn't have called it a mockery myself, but it is a fair point and one
that works in many ways.

New staff and old staff alike are subject to questioning and criticism in
positive and negative light on a daily basis on this list.  For better, for
worse, for both.  As regular and irregular list readers are aware of MZ's
penchant for questions and the hot grill underneath them, Mani handled the
issue beautifully: take it to the wiki.

I'm quite certain I didn't hurt MZ's feelings.  If I hadn't been quite
certain, I wouldn't have been posting.


--
~Keegan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Amir E. Aharoni
In reply to this post by Mani Pande
2011/3/11 Mani Pande <[hidden email]>:

>
>
>> MzMcBride wrote:
>
>> "After having looked at the survey content, the survey software, and the
>> survey format (particularly the length), I have very, very low confidence
>> that anything of value will come from this (beyond lessons of what not to do
>> next time)."
>>
> Based upon my experience having conducted surveys and quantitative
> research for over 12 years, this is a very incorrect assessment of the
> survey. The survey answers questions that are important to the
> foundation, and will help us understand the editor community so we can
> provide them an engaging  editing environment, ensure we can increase
> their needs to increase retention and increase the diversity among
> editors.

...Except the results will be based only on the answers of people who
have patience for a 20-minute survey. It's the year 2011 - in 20
minutes i receive about 20 emails and i have to read them and answer
them. Does the Foundation knowingly want to exclude busy people from
this survey?

I noticed the "Take a WMF-sponsored survey on barriers to expert
participation in Wikipedia." banner on the top of English Wiktionary
the other day. I clicked it and answered a whole page of questions
that were interesting and relevant. And the next page presented the
same bunch of questions again, somewhat rephrased. I hate it when that
happens and i immediately closed the survey; my answers to the
relevant questions on the first page probably went to the drain.

Please consider breaking the twenty-minute into five four-minute
surveys conducted along several months.

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
"We're living in pieces,
 I want to live in peace." - T. Moore



> As for Lime Survey, it is a great open source tool that is able
> to meet all our needs.  Again based upon my experience, a 20 minute
> survey is standard for most surveys. A learning from our last survey was
> that our community is very engaged and I believe the length of the
> survey is the least of our problems.



>
>> The pool of people who will click the banner is already fairly small. The
>> people who will want to start a 20-minute survey is even smaller.
>>
>
> When we did UNU-Merit which was a similar length, we got over 100,000
> complete responses so your assessment that the pool is fairly small is
> unsubstantiated.
>
> If you have more feedback, please post it on the wiki.
> Mani
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Nikola Smolenski-2
On 03/11/2011 10:52 AM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
> I noticed the "Take a WMF-sponsored survey on barriers to expert
> participation in Wikipedia." banner on the top of English Wiktionary
> the other day. I clicked it and answered a whole page of questions
> that were interesting and relevant. And the next page presented the
> same bunch of questions again, somewhat rephrased. I hate it when that
> happens and i immediately closed the survey; my answers to the

This is sometimes done so that if someone is not seriously answering the
form, the answers to similar questions will be different, and so they
may be disregarded. But yeah, experts are probably not going to not
seriously answer the form.

> relevant questions on the first page probably went to the drain.

You could've just clicked 'Next' to the end.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Amir E. Aharoni
2011/3/11 Nikola Smolenski <[hidden email]>:

> On 03/11/2011 10:52 AM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
>> I noticed the "Take a WMF-sponsored survey on barriers to expert
>> participation in Wikipedia." banner on the top of English Wiktionary
>> the other day. I clicked it and answered a whole page of questions
>> that were interesting and relevant. And the next page presented the
>> same bunch of questions again, somewhat rephrased. I hate it when that
>> happens and i immediately closed the survey; my answers to the
>
> This is sometimes done so that if someone is not seriously answering the
> form, the answers to similar questions will be different, and so they
> may be disregarded. But yeah, experts are probably not going to not
> seriously answer the form.

I know - it's not the first time i see a survey with repeated
questions and it's not the first time i fill up a long one. But
sometimes enough is enough. Experts may be severely offended by the
thought that someone suspects they aren't seriously answering the
form. I certainly was and i'm just a B.A.; i suspect that many Ph.D.'s
gave up long before i did.

>> relevant questions on the first page probably went to the drain.
>
> You could've just clicked 'Next' to the end.

The simple answer: Maybe, but how could i know that?

The smartass answer: Maybe, but how could i know that after clicking
'Next' i wouldn't be presented with a stupid JavaScript error message,
punishing me for clicking 'Next' before filling the required fields?

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
"We're living in pieces,
 I want to live in peace." - T. Moore

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Pronoein
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
Le 11/03/2011 04:13, David Gerard a écrit :
> On 11 March 2011 06:32, Pronoein <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hello Keegan. I think this list is not about siding and throwing
>> moqueries at each other. We should respect what each one believes.
>
>
> To have an opinion respected,it helps if that opinion is not both (a)
> snide and (b) provably, factually wrong


Are you saying that disrespect is a well endorsable attitude because
MCZBride deserved it? That's a strong accusation and a rather... strong
punishment too. Anyway, my personnal preference goes to talking and
listening politely and respectfully. I'm not a native speaker, I may
have misunderstood your statement.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
David Gerard wrote:
> To have an opinion respected, it helps if that opinion is not both (a)
> snide and (b) provably, factually wrong

Do you happen to know where the raw data for UNU-Merit survey from 2008 is?
Or even a full survey report? I looked through the four analyses at
<http://www.wikipediasurvey.org/>, but I couldn't find any report that
seemed to be the "full" report. I would expect there to be a report that
explains the survey methodology, for example. Or do you happen to know who I
could ask about that? Most of what I read about this survey indicated that
the full data was going to be released (under a Creative Commons license of
some kind); I'm not quite sure that ever happened, though. I'm probably just
looking in the wrong place, though.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Dario Taraborelli-3
In reply to this post by Nikola Smolenski-2
Nikola, Amir,

let me answer your points as I am one of the people behind the expert
barriers survey. The design with two blocks of questions with a different
framing is intentional and is based on the results of a long pilot that we
ran for one month (Dec 2010-Jan 2011) prior to the official launch. If you
check what is asked at the top of each block, you'll see that we are
expecting participants to answer different types of questions (A: the
perception of factors affecting WP participation among one's peer; B: one's
individual agreement/disagreement with these statements about WP
participation; C: the relation between one's agreement/disagreement and
one's motivation to contribute). This is designed to allow you in principle
to give 3 different answers to A, B, C and that's precisely what we want to
test for.  The design is in no way meant to ask the same question twice just
for the sake of it or because we assume respondents are lazy or inaccurate,
but to help us turn anecdotes into data we can actually study. I am sorry to
hear this didn't work for you and others, the vast majority of respondents
seem to have correctly understood the assignment, and we had a quite amazing
response rate so far from experts, scholars and research students from a
broad range of disciplines. We also have a surprising gender and age balance
among participants and respondents are almost perfectly split into two
groups of people with previous experience as Wikipedia contributors and
people who never edited a single page.

Those of you interested in following the developments and the early results
of this study should keep an eye on this page:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_Committee/Areas_of_interest/Expert_involvement/2011_surveyor
get in touch for feedback or any other issue related to the survey at:
[hidden email]

Thanks,
Dario

On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Nikola Smolenski <[hidden email]>wrote:

> On 03/11/2011 10:52 AM, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
> > I noticed the "Take a WMF-sponsored survey on barriers to expert
> > participation in Wikipedia." banner on the top of English Wiktionary
> > the other day. I clicked it and answered a whole page of questions
> > that were interesting and relevant. And the next page presented the
> > same bunch of questions again, somewhat rephrased. I hate it when that
> > happens and i immediately closed the survey; my answers to the
>
> This is sometimes done so that if someone is not seriously answering the
> form, the answers to similar questions will be different, and so they
> may be disregarded. But yeah, experts are probably not going to not
> seriously answer the form.
>
> > relevant questions on the first page probably went to the drain.
>
> You could've just clicked 'Next' to the end.
>
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Dario Taraborelli-3
In reply to this post by Amir E. Aharoni
> The simple answer: Maybe, but how could i know that?
>
> The smartass answer: Maybe, but how could i know that after clicking
> 'Next' i wouldn't be presented with a stupid JavaScript error message,
> punishing me for clicking 'Next' before filling the required fields?

on the frontpage you can read in a prominent box:

"Please note that you can skip any question (or select "No answer") that you do not wish to answer or that you think does not apply."

there is not a single required field in this survey.

Dario
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Nikola Smolenski-2
In reply to this post by Mani Pande
Дана Tuesday 08 March 2011 01:28:39 Mani Pande написа:

> It is with great pleasure that I would like to inform you that we are in
> the process of the launching Wikipedia's second editor survey. The
> survey is a redo of the UNU-Merit Survey that the foundation had
> conducted last year. The survey covers a variety of topics, but its
> primary goal is to understand the needs and participation of the editing
> community. You can read more about the objectives of the survey in the
> FAQ section in strategy wiki.  The survey will launch in the first week
> of April.
>
> If you have more questions about the survey, you can check out the FAQ
> space on strategy wiki at:
> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Editor_survey_feedback_FAQ
>
> If you have any additional questions, please feel free to email me at
> [hidden email].

I asked Mani directly but he couldn't respond so far, so perhaps this is a
better place.

On the translation page of the survey, I notice that Serbian language isn't
listed. Serbian Wikipedians would like very much to have the survey run. Will
the survey be run on Serbian Wikipedia if we translate it?

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Mani Pande
Hi Nikola,
Yes, if you translate it in Serbian, we will run the survey in Serbian.
We will run the surveys in all languages in which it is translated.  
BTW, I am a girl!!
Mani

Mani Pande, PhD
Head of Global Development Research
Wikimedia Foundation
Twitter: manipande
Skype: manipande


On 3/11/11 11:28 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:

> Дана Tuesday 08 March 2011 01:28:39 Mani Pande написа:
>    
>> It is with great pleasure that I would like to inform you that we are in
>> the process of the launching Wikipedia's second editor survey. The
>> survey is a redo of the UNU-Merit Survey that the foundation had
>> conducted last year. The survey covers a variety of topics, but its
>> primary goal is to understand the needs and participation of the editing
>> community. You can read more about the objectives of the survey in the
>> FAQ section in strategy wiki.  The survey will launch in the first week
>> of April.
>>
>> If you have more questions about the survey, you can check out the FAQ
>> space on strategy wiki at:
>> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Editor_survey_feedback_FAQ
>>
>> If you have any additional questions, please feel free to email me at
>> [hidden email].
>>      
> I asked Mani directly but he couldn't respond so far, so perhaps this is a
> better place.
>
> On the translation page of the survey, I notice that Serbian language isn't
> listed. Serbian Wikipedians would like very much to have the survey run. Will
> the survey be run on Serbian Wikipedia if we translate it?
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>    

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Pronoein
In reply to this post by Mani Pande
Le 11/03/2011 00:57, Mani Pande a écrit :

>
>
>> MzMcBride wrote:
>
>> "After having looked at the survey content, the survey software, and the
>> survey format (particularly the length), I have very, very low confidence
>> that anything of value will come from this (beyond lessons of what not to do
>> next time)."
>>    
> Based upon my experience having conducted surveys and quantitative
> research for over 12 years, this is a very incorrect assessment of the
> survey. The survey answers questions that are important to the
> foundation, and will help us understand the editor community so we can
> provide them an engaging  editing environment, ensure we can increase
> their needs to increase retention and increase the diversity among
> editors. As for Lime Survey, it is a great open source tool that is able
> to meet all our needs.  Again based upon my experience, a 20 minute
> survey is standard for most surveys. A learning from our last survey was
> that our community is very engaged and I believe the length of the
> survey is the least of our problems.


"Increase their needs"? Could you elaborate?




_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Mani Pande
Understand their needs



Mani Pande, PhD
Head of Global Development Research
Wikimedia Foundation
Twitter: manipande
Skype: manipande


On 3/12/11 10:39 AM, Pronoein wrote:

> Le 11/03/2011 00:57, Mani Pande a écrit :
>    
>>
>>      
>>> MzMcBride wrote:
>>>        
>>      
>>> "After having looked at the survey content, the survey software, and the
>>> survey format (particularly the length), I have very, very low confidence
>>> that anything of value will come from this (beyond lessons of what not to do
>>> next time)."
>>>
>>>        
>> Based upon my experience having conducted surveys and quantitative
>> research for over 12 years, this is a very incorrect assessment of the
>> survey. The survey answers questions that are important to the
>> foundation, and will help us understand the editor community so we can
>> provide them an engaging  editing environment, ensure we can increase
>> their needs to increase retention and increase the diversity among
>> editors. As for Lime Survey, it is a great open source tool that is able
>> to meet all our needs.  Again based upon my experience, a 20 minute
>> survey is standard for most surveys. A learning from our last survey was
>> that our community is very engaged and I believe the length of the
>> survey is the least of our problems.
>>      
>
> "Increase their needs"? Could you elaborate?
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>    

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Gerard Meijssen-3
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
Hoi,
Amir wrote a text that I posted on my blog. He wants proper tooling on Meta
to do the translation of the survey. Personally I will not translate at Meta
because I find it horribly inefficient.

My question to Mani is, can you PLEASE take up the suggestion of using the
existing and available tooling so that we can do a better job and become
more efficient ?
Thanks,
      GerardM

PS, you can even automate statistics for a project ...

http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2011/03/give-us-proper-translation-tools-at.html

On 10 March 2011 08:00, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Mani Pande wrote:
> > It is with great pleasure that I would like to inform you that we are in
> > the process of the launching Wikipedia's second editor survey. The
> > survey is a redo of the UNU-Merit Survey that the foundation had
> > conducted last year. The survey covers a variety of topics, but its
> > primary goal is to understand the needs and participation of the editing
> > community. You can read more about the objectives of the survey in the
> > FAQ section in strategy wiki.  The survey will launch in the first week
> > of April.
>
> I looked at the survey that's currently being translated:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Editors_Survey_2011/Translation/en
>
> How was this survey written? Who wrote it? Do the author(s) have any
> background in surveying?
>
> It seems very long and overly complex. Some of the questions it asks seem
> unnecessary given that you could query the information based on the user
> providing the input. Will the username of the person being surveyed be
> recorded and stored? If so, for how long? (I know you talked about
> releasing
> only anonymized data, but I imagine plenty of people would like to know how
> many people such as sysadmins or those administering the survey will have
> access to this data and for how long, if it's being stored at all.)
>
> The survey also seems to use some language that won't translate very easily
> (if at all) into other languages. Terminology and phrasing are particularly
> important in surveying, so this seems more important than it typically
> would
> be.
>
> If a user starts the survey, gets bored, and doesn't finish it, will the
> results be partially saved?
>
> Can a user choose not to answer particular questions? For example, if a
> user
> did not want to answer the gender question, can it simply be skipped? If it
> can be skipped, is this recorded as a skip ("I choose not to answer")?
>
> What survey software is going to be used to conduct the survey (and where
> will it be hosted)? I remember one of the past surveys used some
> particularly bad software that wouldn't allow simple user behavior, such as
> hitting the back button on your browser.
>
> Is the survey software smart enough to not ask questions if a previous
> question has been answered in a particular way? For example, if a user
> answers "no" to participating in future surveys, will the software still
> ask
> for an e-mail address?
>
> Why is it an option to choose "unregistered user" if the survey is only
> being provided to registered users?
>
> Certain terms in the draft are in bold (e.g., "Global South"). Will these
> be
> in bold/highlighted in the published survey? If so, why?
>
> A question about a user's sexual orientation is conspicuously missing
> (given
> that several other questions reference sexual orientation). Was this an
> intentional omission? If so, why?
>
> Is there a concern that a question such as "Do you know whether the
> Wikimedia Foundation that runs Wikipedia is a nonprofit or for-profit
> organization?" might have biased results given that the survey introduction
> specifically notes that the Wikimedia Foundation is a non-profit
> [organization]?
>
> Some questions will presumably have a long list of possible answers (e.g.,
> "What is/are your primary language(s)?"). Will the order of these possible
> answers be alphabetical, based on referring wiki (put English at the top
> for
> users who come from the English Wikipedia), or something else?
>
> Will referring site be tracked (assuming this survey is conducted on a
> separate domain)?
>
> Is there a reason only Wikipedia is being targeted? It seems to me that
> figuring out why other projects have such lower rates of participation
> would
> be pretty important/valuable information, for example. And is there a
> reason
> the page at the strategy wiki isn't more clear about the fact that this is
> limited to a specific wiki family (i.e., "Editor survey feedback" vs.
> "Wikipedia editor survey feedback")?
>
> Who will be in charge of determining which data is released and how? If a
> data trend is embarrassing to the Wikimedia Foundation, there might be an
> incentive to not release that data. Is there a way to combat this? Who has
> final say over what information is released?
>
> Apologies for the slew of questions. I skimmed the FAQ, but didn't see any
> of these answered. If I've simply missed some of these answers and they're
> posted elsewhere, feel free to just drop a link as a reply. :-)
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Editor Survey, 2011

Amir E. Aharoni
In reply to this post by Dario Taraborelli-3
2011/3/11 Dario Taraborelli <[hidden email]>:

>> The simple answer: Maybe, but how could i know that?
>>
>> The smartass answer: Maybe, but how could i know that after clicking
>> 'Next' i wouldn't be presented with a stupid JavaScript error message,
>> punishing me for clicking 'Next' before filling the required fields?
>
> on the frontpage you can read in a prominent box:
>
> "Please note that you can skip any question (or select "No answer") that you do not wish to answer or that you think does not apply."
>
> there is not a single required field in this survey.

I felt so bad about not noticing it (really), that i came back to the
survey to try to fill it again, but in the middle of the first page i
had a break. When i completed the first page and clicked Next, i
received a message saying:

We are sorry but your session has expired.
Either you have been inactive for too long, you have cookies disabled
for your browser, or there were problems with your connection.

I was away for maybe half an hour. That's not "too long".

And if that's not enough, i couldn't use the Back button to restore my answers.

Such things must not happen in WMF surveys.

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
"We're living in pieces,
 I want to live in peace." - T. Moore

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
12