Great, THANKYOU for finally moving on this. Cheers, Craig Franklin
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 10:24:39 -0700 > From: Tilman Bayer <[email protected]> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Upcoming Survey, Feedback requested, and > Office Hour > Message-ID: > <CAPDdKA4Eug= > [email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hi Delphine, > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Delphine M?nard <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Tilman Bayer <[email protected]> > wrote: > ... > >> > >> Still, I was aware that there had been some objections to that > >> question by chapter representatives (which I don't assume have to do > >> with the fact that respondents rated chapters' performance lower than > >> that of other entities in the two previous surveys), and looked into > >> these concerns while the present questionnaire was prepared; I also > >> reached out to one of the critics in person at Wikimania. But I still > >> haven't seen a compelling argument why the way the question is asked > >> should be biased against chapters. The argument that the opinion of > >> Wikimedians who live in countries without chapter should not count > >> seems weak to me, e.g. because the projects that the work of chapters > >> aims to support are international, and because the question asked > >> about chapters in general, not one particular chapter. > > > > That is not the argument I was trying to make (ie. voices of > > Wikimedians in a country without chapter don't count). Rather, there > > is a long list of things the Foundation does, where people are asked > > whether they knew about it, or not. And after that, right when people > > have been made aware of everything the Foundation does, they are asked > > to rate the work of the Foundation. The same question about the > > chapters comes after absolutely nothing has been said about chapter > > work, which, I believe, does introduce a bias. In short, people are > > being asked to rate something they *at this point in the survey* have > > an idea about (for the WMF) although they might have had no idea about > > it before starting the survey. > > All I'm asking is that we review the context in which this question is > > being asked so results make more sense. > OK, after some other people also remarked that preceding this question > by other questions which conveyed quite some information about the > Foundation's activities but not about the chapters' activities. we > have now rearranged the questions so that this is no longer the case. > > This is a bit of a compromise regarding the structuring of the > questionnaire into sections, but fortunately it could be done without > invalidating existing translations or changing the variables of the > resulting dataset. > > Also, the launch of the survey had been postponed into this month for > various reasons, including allowing more time to respond to feedback > like this. > -- > Tilman Bayer > Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) > Wikimedia Foundation > IRC (Freenode): HaeB > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
