> Why is the main "Talk" channel the only one that is producing pushback? Why > is it the only one that is producing such a negative tone? How widely is the > principle of using only open source software adopted across the community?
It is not just "Talk". It is a phenomenon of all English speaking OSM mailing lists and forums. The principle of using only open source software is a very poor ideology. Ignore people embracing it as I do. Makes live much simpler to ignore people not being capable of seeing all sites. In this case open source and closed source. Closed source has its reasons to exist. Apr 30, 2023 19:00:09 Courtney <courtney.william...@gmail.com>: > > We do indeed have people with non technical backgrounds working on the > survey, including a multilingual person with an advanced degree in language > and technology, and a person with an advanced degree in English language. We > have two very experienced data analysts working on it, as well. > > We did not run a trial survey against a random sample because, as I said in > my previous post, this survey is an ancillary part of a larger, long-term > study that relies on publically available data from OSM communication > channels. We are also quite capable of framing our findings within the > context of how the survey was distributed, with appropriate reference to > everything from survey bias, to the difficulties of conducting a free survey > across a global community, to the short amount of time that we have to do the > survey. No one is claiming that we will be able to deliver the one true, > definitive quantitative analysis of OSM communication behaviors to rule them > all. We are attempting to uncover some directional behaviors, and see if we > can foster a better conversation within the community. > > This conversation has opened up important new questions. Why is the main > "Talk" channel the only one that is producing pushback? Why is it the only > one that is producing such a negative tone? How widely is the principle of > using only open source software adopted across the community? We already had > a question to this effect within the survey, but we will now be able to learn > more by adding the limesurvey. None of this is going to be definitive. All of > it is going to be interesting and help raise new questions that hopefully can > be studied. > > Can I ask--what is the fundamental objection to us trying to learn a bit more > about OSM communication habits? I understand the impulse to give advice--this > is welcome even when the advice is predicated on the idea that we lack any > kind of insight or experience--there is always more to learn. But, I don't > understand the degree of ire and frankly, incredulity that is being levied > here. Should we wait until there is a university study that is fully funded > and staffed, and with a perfect approach, with a year's worth of pre-testing, > to ask these questions? Is that the standard here? Wait for perfection or do > nothing? Is that how OSM itself was built? I don't understand the tone or > the defensiveness of these comments. If the goal is to advance the OSM > project, is it better to gate keep all inquiries to a suffocating degree? Or > to try to learn and grow? > > On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 11:45 AM John Whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Just a comment on Fredrick's input. Selecting the sample is one of the most >> difficult parts of a survey to get right. The self selection part of this >> survey makes it open to bias, as Frederick has commented this is compounded >> by the platform. I'm not making a comment about if the platform is >> appropriate or not just that if it affects your response then it begins to >> cast doubt on your results. >> >> The second is knowing enough about your target audience so they will >> understand your questions. Perhaps have someone non technical with an >> English Language background, a librarian, for example check it for jargon. >> One technique is to run a trial survey against a true random sample. I >> don't think this was done here. >> >> If they don't understand what you're asking then you aren't going to get a >> reliable answers and to be honest I didn't. >> >> I'm not sure if this particular survey is trying to justify a particular >> stance or get accurate information. >> >> Cheerio John >> >> Frederik Ramm wrote on 4/30/2023 11:18 AM: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 4/28/23 15:57, Marc_marc wrote: >>>> I am impressed (and disappointed) that those who do these surveys >>>> have still not learned that part of the active opendata community >>>> does not wish to ally a closeddata based enterprise (nominally: >>>> no use of google forms for some of us). >>> >>> Agree. It's one thing for an OSMF working group to use a closed >>> source/siloed product internally, but quite another to attempt to engage >>> with the community via such a product. >>> >>> I am not surprised when a commercial company like Tom Tom does that without >>> a second thought, but I would expect more from an OSMF working group. >>> >>> Please find a way for non-Google users to participate in this survey, or >>> your results will be biased to the point of un-suitability because they >>> will lack responses from people who'd rather not engage with Google, i.e. >>> the whole "communication behaviours" of this group of people would not be >>> represented. >>> >>> Bye >>> Frederik >>> >> >> -- >> Sent from Postbox[https://www.postbox-inc.com] >> _______________________________________________ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > -- > > --Courtney Cook Williamson > survivalbybook.substack.com[http://survivalbybook.substack.com]
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
