Survey Threads

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

Same reason that when someone posts a spam link in a group chat, 20 messages follow discussing the spammer.

 

Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one and the ability to control that desire to be heard varies, just like my response here, I was just going to ignore you but failed miserably.

---

Simple, succinct, to the point and sums it up perfectly.

And now I'm going to screw up by saying more.

I respond in one of three ways to Surveys: I participate, I ignore or I state what I see as it's shortcomings which may come across as criticism.

When it comes to the poorly done Surveys really it's the teachers who I'd like to jump on.  I have even suggested to OP's that they show their teachers the responses they got there. 

So that the teachers can do a better job of preparing their students.

One thing I did mention to you in the deleted thread Phil was that many of us who participate in this Forum on a regular basis are older adults and the Survey Takers (and other younger adults who post in general) don't realise that when they post.  Conversely we forget they are younger adults and don't temper our words accordingly.  Though at this point in their lives sometimes some of them should know a whole lot better.

---

Sometimes one of the most valuable things a teacher can do for a student is to let them make mistakes so they'll see what happens. It's a lot safer to learn the results of careless questioning on an internet forum then in some village full of sharp farm implements.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

Actually, your post in yesterday's thread was very good on whole, Maddy. I don't remember every detail of it (that's why i said "on the whole"

), but I do remember you offering a rewrite suggestion for each question. I assume the reason you did that was becuase the student had been shocked by the reactions, and actually asked what he could change to make it right.

I'm really only asking about those who feel the need to be just plain negative in survey threads, to the point of being shameful, when is absolutely unnecessary.

---

I did jump in because the student expressed shock, though my rewrites were not so much to show the right way as to illuminate the errors in the wrong way. I'm not there to write their surveys, but to get them to think differently. (Some would say I'm here to get people to think my way, but that's only because I haven't got them to think differently... yet ;-).

I also pointed out that the appearance of certainty ("It's a good survey") can throw up unwanted roadblocks. I suffer fewer rude awakenings if I'm not slumbering under a blanket of certitude and fewer still if I remain awake.

The survey made no allowance for SL having a positive effect on people. And so even you were reduced to stating that someone who was completely unaffected by SL would be seen as "a positive". To hold that perception, one must make the presumption that SL effects are not positive. What about those people who suffer anxiety or uncertainty in public situations, and use SL to build confidence? Or those with disabilities that limit their opportunities for socialization, who find access to acceptance here?

For as skeptical as I am about the overall value of virtual worlds like SL, I do see positives. We ignore them at our own risk

. Because of this, I agree with Freya that criticizing the survey is a form of public service.

If you are taking issue more with the perceived intent of the criticism than with the criticism itself, I can't say your dismay is misplaced. How's that for wishy-washy?

---

lol. You do know that I love you, don't you, Maddy

It's the intent. I see much of it as intending to jump on the student just because it's a survey and we're not "lab rats", and we don't "do your work for you", etc. The very first words in the first response were, "Just the same old <blah blah balh>", and it carried on in the same negative way for the most part. It happens with most survey threads. Occasionally there's one that seems to meet with some approval, especially if there's money attached!

A fair number of people commented on the negative nature of the actual questions and I posted a further thought concerning that. You may not have read it (yet). It struck me as extrememly valid, perhaps even important, to question whether or not immersive systems like SL have detrimental effects on every day living. The survey actually addressed that. So I no longer see a bias or pre-judgement in the questions. I see them as being extremely valid questionss to ask in a survey, even when they are the only questions asked.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

Same reason that when someone posts a spam link in a group chat, 20 messages follow discussing the spammer.

 

Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one and the ability to control that desire to be heard varies, just like my response here, I was just going to ignore you but failed miserably.

---

Simple, succinct, to the point and sums it up perfectly.

And now I'm going to screw up by saying more.

I respond in one of three ways to Surveys: I participate, I ignore or I state what I see as it's shortcomings which may come across as criticism.

When it comes to the poorly done Surveys really it's the teachers who I'd like to jump on.  I have even suggested to OP's that they show their teachers the responses they got there.  So that the teachers can do a better job of preparing their students.

One thing I did mention to you in the deleted thread Phil was that many of us who participate in this Forum on a regular basis are older adults and the Survey Takers (and other younger adults who post in general) don't realise that when they post.  Conversely we forget they are younger adults and don't temper our words accordingly.  Though at this point in their lives sometimes some of them should know a whole lot better.

---

I'd forgotten that you were in the thread, Perrie but, now that you've said what you wrote there, I do remember reading it. Wouldn't it be nice if everyone treated survey threads as you do, especailly if constructive criticism actually sounds like it's constructive criticism and not just fault-finding.

The likely age differences probably do make a difference, with us treating a student as our age - able to take what we can throw - and vice versa.

[Sophia2976]

I'm brand new to the forum so I have not seen any survey threads but I would respond respectfully if they were constructed respectfully. This has been a interesting discussion to read through.

[Phil Deakins]

Welcome, Atam. It's good to have tempted you out of the hidden realms of LurkWorld

---

Atma Constantine wrote:

It seems from reading the forums for years that when someone may hint at SL bringing out an unhealthy addiction people jump all over that in defense. Anything can become an unhealthy addiction if the person has that type of personality.

---

That thought did cross my mind - defensiveness. "Me addicted? How dare you suggest such a thing!" That sort of attitude. I've no idea if anyone has such an attitude but it did cross my mind. Tank you for voicing it.

As an aside, I was most definitely addicted to SL for quite a long time after I started. And I've been addicted to other game-type things too in the past - online and offline. I even Lemminged my way out of a very luctrative business at one time. (Lemmings was a very addictive game - at least to me it was ). I don't mind anyone knowing, but I can appreciate that some people not only wouldn't want others to know, but maybe don't even admit it to themselves.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Sophia2976 wrote:

I'm brand new to the forum so I have not seen any survey threads but I would respond respectfully if they were constructed respectfully. This has been a interesting discussion to read through.

---

Welcome to the forum, Sophia, and thank you for that contribution.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

Actually, your post in yesterday's thread was very good on whole, Maddy. I don't remember every detail of it (that's why i said "on the whole"

), but I do remember you offering a rewrite suggestion for each question. I assume the reason you did that was becuase the student had been shocked by the reactions, and actually asked what he could change to make it right.

I'm really only asking about those who feel the need to be just plain negative in survey threads, to the point of being shameful, when is absolutely unnecessary.

---

I did jump in because the student expressed shock, though my rewrites were not so much to show the right way as to illuminate the errors in the wrong way. I'm not there to write their surveys, but to get them to think differently. (Some would say I'm here to get people to think my way, but that's only because I haven't got them to think differently... yet ;-).

I also pointed out that the appearance of certainty ("It's a good survey") can throw up unwanted roadblocks. I suffer fewer rude awakenings if I'm not slumbering under a blanket of certitude and fewer still if I remain awake.

The survey made no allowance for SL having a positive effect on people. And so even you were reduced to stating that someone who was completely unaffected by SL would be seen as "a positive". To hold that perception, one must make the presumption that SL effects are not positive. What about those people who suffer anxiety or uncertainty in public situations, and use SL to build confidence? Or those with disabilities that limit their opportunities for socialization, who find access to acceptance here?

For as skeptical as I am about the overall value of virtual worlds like SL, I do see positives. We ignore them at our own risk

. Because of this, I agree with Freya that criticizing the survey is a form of public service.

If you are taking issue more with the perceived intent of the criticism than with the criticism itself, I can't say your dismay is misplaced. How's that for wishy-washy?

---

lol. You do know that I love you, don't you, Maddy

It's the intent. I see much of it as intending to jump on the student just because it's a survey and we're not "lab rats", and we don't "do your work for you", etc. The very first words in the first response were, "

Just the same old <blah blah balh>

", and it carried on in the same negative way for the most part. It happens with most survey threads. Occasionally there's one that seems to meet with some approval, especially if there's money attached!

A fair number of people commented on the negative nature of the actual questions and I posted a further thought concerning that. You may not have read it (yet). It struck me as extrememly valid, perhaps even important, to question whether or not immersive systems like SL have detrimental effects on every day living. The survey actually addressed that. So I no longer see a bias or pre-judgement in the questions. I see them as being extremely valid questionss to ask in a survey, even when they are the only questions asked.

---

It's absolutely valid to question whether virtual worlds can have detrimental effects. As I said elsewhere, I'm a virtual world skeptic. But what's the value of an experiment that presupposes the result, or doesn't allow for the unexpected?

The most grievous question in the survey was something like "Do you become defensive/secretive when asked about what you do in SL?". The presence of that question indicates the student had very little understanding of the survey itself and/or the nature of anonymous polling. Those who do become secretive when asked may not respond to the survey at all, or lie. Errors in design like that annoy me. If the survey was directed at people who've self identified the potential for addiction, the likelihood of deception drops considerably. That's wasn't the case here.

Oh, and in case anyone wonders, of course I become secretive when asked what I do here. I become secretive when asked what I'm doing anywhere. Who on Earth would own up my fantasies? But nobody knows I'm being secretive, cuz I'm really good at lying.

Love you too, Phil!

;-).

[Syo Emerald]

---

Atma Constantine wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

Yesterday, a student from Warsaw posted a typical survey thread, and it got the typical negative treatment that almost all such threads get here. Later, the thread was removed for some unknown (and definitely unjust, unless the OP asked for it) reason. So I have a question about survey threads:-

Why do they get such negative treatment from some of this forum's users, when, if someone doesn't like them, it's so much easier to simply ignore them?

---

The answer to your OP lies within many of the answers you received here. There is a large group of people that can't post to a thread with a non-biased response that is constructive yet still polite. It's human nature for everyone, just many don't know how to use a filter, nor do they care to.

It seems from reading the forums for years that when someone may hint at SL bringing out an unhealthy addiction people jump all over that in defense. Anything can become an unhealthy addiction if the person has that type of personality.

---

Yes, it can* be. But defending ones hobby or pastime is on its own not a valid point to diagnose if someone is influenced in an unhealthy way by it or addicted. When we chose something as a hobby, it becomes a very personal thing and any attack against our hobby becomes indirect an attack against ourself. Of course people start to get defensive then, especially when they feel unfairly judged. I can feel annoyed and deny the biased opinion hidden within this survey without being addicted. I may just not like it, when someone comes around the corner and gives me a survey, which basically says people with this hobby are all *insert random negative thing here*. How suprising! Not everyone that does not agree with the statement of a survey is secretly addicted.

 

*Many people who suffer from addiction are very well aware of their addiction. They realize the negative impacts it has on their life, but the main symptom of an addiction is that you can't stop your behavior anymore, even if its damageing important things, like your health.

 

[Phil Deakins]

Sigh...

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

...English language...

---

Step 1 of building a survey - tune it to your audience. The survey was conducted in English, presumably the student knew this forum spoke English. Failure to make the survey readable in English - while presenting it to an English audience - is a failure to produce a survey. There's a Polish forum where the student could've asked for Polish opinion in a language they could present clearly, but they didn't do this. (This actually helps indicate to me that the student wanted pageviews and box-checking, they weren't so interested in being understood, or having their survey discussed - making it inappropriate for this forum)

And that may well be exactly what he did as best he could. Let me suggest one possibility. He wrote it in his native language, using a word for 'never' that translates into Englsh as 'does not apply'. Perhaps the word in Polish has more than one meaning and one of them is 'does not apply'. Quite frankly, it's really really bad to criticise a non-native english speaker for using an englsih phrase, the intended meaning of which was patently obvious to anyone who cared to put 2 seconds of thought into it.

 

None of us know what the survey is trying to achieve...

No, but that is not the same as being able to tell what the survey

can

achieve. Anyone with proper statistics/research experience can determine this. Myself, Syo and Amethyst all provide insights here, if this experience is lacking in yourself.

 

It is not our concern what the survey can achieve. Why is that so difficult to understand? Just answer the student's questions, or not, and leave the student to look after him/herself. It really is very very easy.

 

It's not our concern...

How much of what's posted on this forum

is

 my concern? What threads am I allowed to reply to? This is a public forum, all posters submit themselves to our collective judgement. I also find it surprising that you're suggesting people don't comment rather than post negatively while still constructively. You're welcome to define the border of your concern as you please, but I don't think you have any way of knowing what issues

might

concern me or anyone else.

What is not your concern, or anyone else's here, is whether or not the survey is written well, and whether or not any meaningful data can be realised from it. Just answer the questions, or not, and leave the survey to the student. The rest is none of our business.

 

A public service?

It helps protect, encourage and support the important majority (the Second Life community) while mildly inconveniencing someone who had no intention of joining our community. Spam and exploitation (the worst case scenarios for the students behaviour) are absolutely something this community needs protection against.

I'm sorry but that is going way off the track of surveys and this discussion. If you discouraged anyone at all from filling in that perfectly innocent survey, then you did nobody, repeat

nobody

, and favours at all. You protected and supported nobody at all from anything whatsoever. The survey was neither spam nor exploitation, so how you could imagine you did a public service is way beyond my comprehension.

---

[Phil Deakins]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

Actually, your post in yesterday's thread was very good on whole, Maddy. I don't remember every detail of it (that's why i said "on the whole"

), but I do remember you offering a rewrite suggestion for each question. I assume the reason you did that was becuase the student had been shocked by the reactions, and actually asked what he could change to make it right.

I'm really only asking about those who feel the need to be just plain negative in survey threads, to the point of being shameful, when is absolutely unnecessary.

---

I did jump in because the student expressed shock, though my rewrites were not so much to show the right way as to illuminate the errors in the wrong way. I'm not there to write their surveys, but to get them to think differently. (Some would say I'm here to get people to think my way, but that's only because I haven't got them to think differently... yet ;-).

I also pointed out that the appearance of certainty ("It's a good survey") can throw up unwanted roadblocks. I suffer fewer rude awakenings if I'm not slumbering under a blanket of certitude and fewer still if I remain awake.

The survey made no allowance for SL having a positive effect on people. And so even you were reduced to stating that someone who was completely unaffected by SL would be seen as "a positive". To hold that perception, one must make the presumption that SL effects are not positive. What about those people who suffer anxiety or uncertainty in public situations, and use SL to build confidence? Or those with disabilities that limit their opportunities for socialization, who find access to acceptance here?

For as skeptical as I am about the overall value of virtual worlds like SL, I do see positives. We ignore them at our own risk

. Because of this, I agree with Freya that criticizing the survey is a form of public service.

If you are taking issue more with the perceived intent of the criticism than with the criticism itself, I can't say your dismay is misplaced. How's that for wishy-washy?

---

lol. You do know that I love you, don't you, Maddy

It's the intent. I see much of it as intending to jump on the student just because it's a survey and we're not "lab rats", and we don't "do your work for you", etc. The very first words in the first response were, "

Just the same old <blah blah balh>

", and it carried on in the same negative way for the most part. It happens with most survey threads. Occasionally there's one that seems to meet with some approval, especially if there's money attached!

A fair number of people commented on the negative nature of the actual questions and I posted a further thought concerning that. You may not have read it (yet). It struck me as extrememly valid, perhaps even important, to question whether or not immersive systems like SL have detrimental effects on every day living. The survey actually addressed that. So I no longer see a bias or pre-judgement in the questions. I see them as being extremely valid questionss to ask in a survey, even when they are the only questions asked.

---

It's absolutely valid to question whether virtual worlds can have detrimental effects. As I said elsewhere, I'm a virtual world skeptic.

But what's the value of an experiment that presupposes the result, or doesn't allow for the unexpected?

The most grievous question in the survey was something like "Do you become defensive/secretive when asked about what you do in SL?". The presence of that question indicates the student had very little understanding of the survey itself and/or the nature of anonymous polling. Those who do become secretive when asked may not respond to the survey at all, or lie. Errors in design like that annoy me. If the survey was directed at people who've self identified the potential for addiction, the likelihood of deception drops considerably. That's wasn't the case here.

Oh, and in case anyone wonders, of course I become secretive when asked what I do here. I become secretive when asked what I'm doing anywhere. Who on Earth would own up my fantasies? But nobody knows I'm being secretive, cuz I'm really good at lying.

Love you too, Phil!

;-).

---

The value in this case was to the student. Nothing more. It didn't presuppose the answers unless you mean by omitting a means of giving a different answer than the options provided. Either way, the value of the survey was to the student. Unfortunately, because of the reactions in the thread, s/he's gone away with no value at all in terms of results. S/he may have gained some understanding on how to do it next time from your post, but not the value that s/he came for.

[Atma Constantine]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

Welcome, Atam. It's good to have tempted you out of the hidden realms of LurkWorld

---

Atma Constantine wrote:

It seems from reading the forums for years that when someone may hint at SL bringing out an unhealthy addiction people jump all over that in defense. Anything can become an unhealthy addiction if the person has that type of personality.

---

That thought did cross my mind - defensiveness. "Me addicted? How dare you suggest such a thing!" That sort of attitude. I've no idea if anyone has such an attitude but it did cross my mind. Tank you for voicing it.

 

 

As an aside, I was most definitely addicted to SL for quite a long time after I started. And I've been addicted to other game-type things too in the past - online and offline. I even Lemminged my way out of a very luctrative business at one time. (Lemmings was a very addictive game - at least to me it was

). I don't mind anyone knowing, but I can appreciate that some people not only wouldn't want others to know, but maybe don't even admit it to themselves.

---

Thank you. I don't know the reason behind the defensiveness, only the person that responds in that way knows. When an experience is new to someone and it's enjoyable or intriguing, I think there is always some amount of desire to spend time doing it.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

---

Sometimes one of the most valuable things a teacher can do for a student is to let them make mistakes so they'll see what happens. It's a lot safer to learn the results of careless questioning on an internet forum then in some village full of sharp farm implements.

---

I'm aware of this also.  What's that thing about Edison and the Light Bulb?  He didn't consider his failed attempts "failures" bur rather "learning what didn't work."

But I'm still left with the impression that the students have either not heeded the lesson or have not been instructed in the first place.

A coach does not teach the wrong way of doing things first if at all.  Coaches will tell you, it's harder to break someone who has been taught wrong of bad habits than it is to teach someone who has not developed any habits at all.

[Atma Constantine]

---

Syo Emerald wrote:

---

Atma Constantine wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

Yesterday, a student from Warsaw posted a typical survey thread, and it got the typical negative treatment that almost all such threads get here. Later, the thread was removed for some unknown (and definitely unjust, unless the OP asked for it) reason. So I have a question about survey threads:-

Why do they get such negative treatment from some of this forum's users, when, if someone doesn't like them, it's so much easier to simply ignore them?

---

The answer to your OP lies within many of the answers you received here. There is a large group of people that can't post to a thread with a non-biased response that is constructive yet still polite. It's human nature for everyone, just many don't know how to use a filter, nor do they care to.

It seems from reading the forums for years that when someone may hint at SL bringing out an unhealthy addiction people jump all over that in defense. Anything can become an unhealthy addiction if the person has that type of personality.

---

Yes, it

can*

be. But defending ones hobby or pastime is on its own not a valid point to diagnose if someone is influenced in an unhealthy way by it or addicted. When we chose something as a hobby, it becomes a very personal thing and any attack against our hobby becomes indirect an attack against ourself. Of course people start to get defensive then, especially when they feel unfairly judged. I can feel annoyed and deny the biased opinion hidden within this survey without being addicted. I may just not like it, when someone comes around the corner and gives me a survey, which basically says people with this hobby are all *insert random negative thing here*. How suprising! Not everyone that does not agree with the statement of a survey is secretly addicted.

 

*Many people who suffer from addiction are very well aware of their addiction. They realize the negative impacts it has on their life, but the main symptom of an addiction is that you can't stop your behavior anymore, even if its damageing important things, like your health.

 

---

My mention was factual about how people respond to the topic of SL being an unhealthy addiction. I do not know why anyone responds that way, that would only be known by the poster as I stated. I can't diagnose if it is unhealthy or not as I do not know the person. That comment I made was in reference as to the responses the OP had received with only a few actually answering what he had originaly asked. Views on addiction vary, even the ones that realize their beast. That is a whole other topic.

 

[Phil Deakins]

I don't doubt anything you wrote, Ardvinna. What made me angry yesterday was not the genuinely constructive posts, written as genuine constructive posts (I remember Maddy's but I can't remember Amethysts), but the rest that were just student-bashing, simply because s/he posted a survey here.

[Tex Monday]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

The most grievous question in the survey was something like

"Do you become defensive/secretive when asked about what you do in SL?".

The presence of that question indicates the student had very little understanding of the survey itself and/or the nature of anonymous polling. Those who do become secretive when asked may not respond to the survey at all, or lie. Errors in design like that annoy me. If the survey was directed at people who've self identified the potential for addiction, the likelihood of deception drops considerably. That's wasn't the case here.

---

 That statement goes along with why I usually say to people who are brand spanking new (and probably should be spanked) that they should get inworld and find out what SL is all about before asking questions. I think that they probably had this assignment, decided "Oh, I know second life is an on-line virtual world...let's use that"

IMO, it's like someone saying "What's an apple?" (the fruit, not the computer) by only having heard that apples exist. It's very easy to go find an apple, buy it, smell it, and then taste it...rather than going to an online forum and asking questions. It also gives you a better idea of what types of questions to ask.

Ok..maybe it's a bad example and I'm rambling a bit again, but I feel you need some background in how things work in order to create a workable survey about it.  

[Lexia Moonstone]

I've all ways wondered how many surveys in LS have ended up being abandoned or came to the conclusion that people in SL are rude,   and because of the negative responses how many people doing surveys ever come back to SL.  People doing RL education and surveys in SL is a great way to get them over the never logging in a second time thing that happens with some many new people in SL.  May be there would be more people in SL if we  welcomed them instead of posting lots of negative comments.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Phil Deakins wrote (and I edited):

The value in this case was to the student, but not the value that s/he came for.

---

I couldn't have said it better myself, Phil!

;-).

[Phil Deakins]

---

Tex Monday wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

The most grievous question in the survey was something like

"Do you become defensive/secretive when asked about what you do in SL?".

The presence of that question indicates the student had very little understanding of the survey itself and/or the nature of anonymous polling. Those who do become secretive when asked may not respond to the survey at all, or lie. Errors in design like that annoy me. If the survey was directed at people who've self identified the potential for addiction, the likelihood of deception drops considerably. That's wasn't the case here.

---

 That statement goes along with why I usually say to people who are brand spanking new (and probably should be spanked) that they should get inworld and find out what SL is all about before asking questions. I think that they probably had this assignment, decided "Oh, I know second life is an on-line virtual world...let's use that"

IMO, it's like someone saying "What's an apple?" (the fruit, not the computer) by only having heard that apples exist. It's very easy to go find an apple, buy it, smell it, and then taste it...rather than going to an online forum and asking questions. It also gives you a better idea of what types of questions to ask.

Ok..

maybe it's a bad example

and I'm rambling a bit again, but I feel you need some background in how things work in order to create a workable survey about it.  

---

It's more of a bad apple

[Atma Constantine]

---

Ardvinna wrote:

I saw the survey request, and I saw some reactions on it, but I didn't follow it till the end. In the German Forum we had also a request, not well done, too.

In my opinion the surveys and the statistics aren't the right approach to examine/to investigate the human mind. It should remain an auxiliar and Statistics also. Statistics are good for counting bacteria, but not to explore the human mind! (my personal view)

So I think, the reason why people are "reacting" on survey requests is this very inappropriate way to do research about their thoughts and feelings. For me it is a deficiency in the modern form of research in psychology (just check lists and tally sheets). As far as I remember, I saw only one really good made survey here. That's why most of the people are suggesting, that the students should go in sl and try out for themselves. I would also suggest something like this:

a "field research":

-being a while in sl, talking to the people and at the end doing their research with a combination of a survey and  a narrative conversation guideline.

Amethyst replied wise words yesterday to the student concerning the ethics of research; If you're doing a research on people, human beings, you have to follow very strong rules, for good reasons.

What I very often miss, when students are asking here for help, is the knowledge about these rules for good research practice and I miss a  structure.

So possible reasons: Here in Europe we had a european wide reform of the universities. Since then the students are forced just to "produce", like on a assembly belt,  seminar/project papers.  Additionally you can't become a professor if you don't publish like "on a assembly belt". Teaching and mentoring students don't count for the carreer. The results are students mostly in a hurry without a mentor.

But I also miss, that this student didn't read already published scientific works on sl and virtuality.

So what people in the forum can do? Are they responsible for the students in the whole world? Isn't it understandable that people want to protect their thoughts and feelings?

On the other hand I would help the students in world, if they would make these "field researches". But the problem is that they usually don't have the time for it!

Hmm....

Why they don't ignore them? I did ignore him, but I think this wasn't right too. Perhaps there should be a wiki for them, as someone suggested. But actually it is the duty of their mentors to explain them the right way. And if they have good mentors, then the survey is also well done, as we see it sometimes here.

---

I know you did not post to me. Many of your points seem very valid and make perfect sense. However; everyone has the right to post on here, what they choose as everyone has the right to comment on those posts in whichever way they choose as well.

The OP was about ignoring the surveys if no answer or not giving constuctive criticism in a more positive way. This OP has only received a few actual responses to his question. he did not question the morals of the survey, or anything else. He just asked a simple question which seems hard for people to stay on track with the OP.

 

[Phil Deakins]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote (and I edited):

The value in this case was to the student, but not the value that s/he came for.

---

I couldn't have said it better myself, Phil!

;-).

---

And I couldn't have edited it better myself, Maddy

[Tex Monday]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

It's more of a bad apple

---

 I learned from the best....

*nudges his head toward Ms. McMasters* :matte-motes-sunglasses-3:

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

Same reason that when someone posts a spam link in a group chat, 20 messages follow discussing the spammer.

---

Half this, and half the disrespect of being presumed to be a lab rat.

SL gets the "oh you are the weird people I heard were on the internet" treatment everytime by the mere fact that these surveys pop up.

Why are they not posting these surveys to WebMD looking to see what kind of freaks are reading that? Why not survey every freak that uses google? Or Bing? Or all those freaks that use Yelp?

Because those are the normal people... They "know" they're normal, so there's nothing to look for in surveying them.

 

But the freaks here... even freakier than those MMO people - that's a research goldmins to explain why freaks freak, and WTF with the freaks being freaky in their freakout of a freakverse...

I think people who use SL, just get tired of being thrown into the "those people with computers and fursuits and weirdness" category...

 

"Teh Interwebz" isn't new anymore... people need to get over the fact that some people use it...

This is just a 10-year old online F2P video game... move along and put your lab around a different set of rats.

 

[Dillon Levenque]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

When I'm accosted by a surveyist in public, I generally demure. That's because I go out in public for a other reasons, usually to get replacement parts for my tractor. If the local John Deere dealership ever invites me to take a survey, I'm in.

---

 

I found one for you. It's a bit inactive at the moment, but you could add it to your faves list and check it every now and then. Give you something else to think about as you teeter on the edge of despair ;-).

https://www.johndeeresurveys.com/R.aspx?a=206

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

When I'm accosted by a surveyist in public, I generally demure. That's because I go out in public for a other reasons, usually to get replacement parts for my tractor. If the local John Deere dealership ever invites me to take a survey, I'm in.

---

 

I found one for you. It's a bit inactive at the moment, but you could add it to your faves list and check it every now and then. Give you something else to think about as you teeter on the edge of despair ;-).

https://www.johndeeresurveys.com/R.aspx?a=206

---

You're mean.

I am now going place the back of my hand to my forehead, signaling my inconsolable anguish, then hurl myself from the green and yellow cliffs of despair.

I hope you're pleased.

[Perrie Juran]

 

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

When I'm accosted by a surveyist in public, I generally demure. That's because I go out in public for a other reasons, usually to get replacement parts for my tractor. If the local John Deere dealership ever invites me to take a survey, I'm in.

---

I found one for you. It's a bit inactive at the moment, but you could add it to your faves list and check it every now and then. Give you something else to think about as you teeter on the edge of despair ;-).

https://www.johndeeresurveys.com/R.aspx?a=206

---

Even better for her....I saw this advertised on TV last night.

Only Farmers Dating