Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Proposed amendment to the survey posting amendment.Follow

#1 Mar 17 2011 at 4:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,875 posts
The following is a proposed amendment to amendment 1 - survey posting. Changes are in Red. Please fill out the poll at the bottoim of the thread, and provide any feedback in this thread. This ammendment is draft and is not yet in force.

Draft Draft Draft - Amendment 1 Survey poting proposed changes
Green - additional changes based on feedback

Survey posting by outside parties is allowed only for educational purposes. Commercial surveys, or surveys without an academic background are expressly prohibited and will be immediately removed. Our primary focus is the safety and security of our existing user base, and as such we will deny any surveys with questions that could lead to security breaches.

Prior to posting any survey, you are required to contact one of the following Forum Administrators:

Kaolian@allakhazam.com

darqflame@allakhazam.com

And to provide verified contact information and academic credentials, including a university associated e-mail address from which the request originates. A full, unaltered copy of the survey questions must also be provided.


A survey may only be posted by someone with premium membership or at least 500 posts and or 3 months active posting in the forums. Exceptions may be made for anyone willing to donate to charity instead of purchaseing premium, however proof of donation would be required. This will allow us an additional level of security in ensuring the survey data you post will not be used against our site users, along with ensuring that you are contributing something to the maintenance and upkeep of our site, thus giving back to the users whose data you wish to collect.
Any survey found to contain questions or data collection fields that could present a security risk to the accounts of our users will be automatically denied.

Any survey worded to support a preconceived position on topics related to “Gaming addiction” or other areas intended to paint all gamers in a stereotypical negative light
are strongly discouraged. There are hundreds of such surveys already in existence, go use one of those.

A maximum of 1 survey per 7 day period will be allowed. Any more frequent, and our site users get annoyed. This survey will be on a first come, first serve basis of surveys that meet the posting criteria.


All other survey posts will be removed and the originating account banned.

In-forum poll system exemption: This amendment specifically does not cover in forum polls generated by forum users. The intent is to prevent unnecessary spam by outside entities with no real investment in the forum system.

Regarding the proposed survey rule changes:
The origional rules were strong enough :15 (10.6%)
The origional rules were too strong and should be relaxed :5 (3.5%)
I prefer the new rules :104 (73.2%)
I would prefer something stronger than the proposed new rules :18 (12.7%)
Total:142


Edited, Mar 17th 2011 10:29pm by Kaolian
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#2 Mar 17 2011 at 4:52 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
9,260 posts
My view is very few people are excited to answer these surveys. Making people who want to administer them at least pay for premium is a very good idea IMO. Since they don't really contribute to the community of the boards - they should at least contribute to the upkeep.

I also really like the part about pre-conceived notions about gaming addiction etc. - I highly support rule changes which will make it harder for people to glean data that will be twisted in a way that just demonizes gamers.

Edited, Mar 17th 2011 3:54pm by Olorinus
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.

clicky
#3 Mar 17 2011 at 5:03 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,888 posts
Olorinus the Vile wrote:

I also really like the part about pre-conceived notions about gaming addiction etc. - I highly support rule changes which will make it harder for people to glean data that will be twisted in a way that just demonizes gamers.

Edited, Mar 17th 2011 3:54pm by Olorinus


That. Also, I don't think 1 per 7 days is good enough. Make it 15. I try to answer the ones I think are interesting, but one every week is too much.
#4 Mar 17 2011 at 5:10 PM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,051 posts
Thank god for the "game addiction" thing. Tired of filling out surveys asking me if games have ruined my life and then there's no "No" answer.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#5 Mar 17 2011 at 5:15 PM Rating: Good
Mazra wrote:
Thank god for the "game addiction" thing. Tired of filling out surveys asking me if games have ruined my life and then there's no "No" answer.
It is there, your subconsciousness just blocks it out.
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#6 Mar 17 2011 at 5:22 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
174 posts
Or, set up a new sub-forum 'Surveys'. Stick a warning at the top about possible security breaches. Make a premium subscription a prerequisite of posting a survey, if you like. Nobody gets annoyed by a survey unless they choose to, and mods are saved a considerable amount of work checking them out.
#7 Mar 17 2011 at 5:52 PM Rating: Good
Muggle@#%^er
Avatar
*****
19,768 posts
The premium thing seems excessive, but I'm on board with the other two.

But maybe we can add in a clause for surveys that involve charity donations? For instance, there was that one in the WoW forums recently where he'd donate to child's play for each person who did the survey, up to $100. That seems like it shouldn't demand premium or be included in the 7 day thing.

Of course, it isn't like we can actually KNOW if they did it or not.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#8 Mar 17 2011 at 5:53 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
523 posts
So you want only students posting surveys. Everyone who posts surveys must be a premium member. This seems like quite a contradiction to me because every student I know wouldn't have extra money to spend on a premium membership.

The new rules certainly help protect the users, but the end effect is real close to just saying that there will be no more surveys allowed. Of course, you wouldn't hear much complaint from the users if you just did that.

I do like the new wording about screening for biased surveys.
#9 Mar 17 2011 at 5:57 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
1,955 posts
I'd like to see support for academic surveys limited to those surveys which are reasonably connected to the student's field of study. There are degrees for game design, I could even understand something like statistics or a vaguely worded paper for high school, but things like a WOW study for fabric design?

Quote:
I'm to become an artisan in textile and clothing design and production and all is left is the degree work. I'm weaving a tapestry that has a video game motive on it and therefor games are also the subject for my written degree work. Especially the social aspect of online games, being a player myself, I've thought about it quite a lot.


There is a level of "scholarship" that I'm willing to support, but this falls below it.

Edit: I strongly support the other provisions of the proposed draft, explicitly including the requirement that they be premium members. As a note on the one week waiting period -- it may be too short because it is too easy for them to keep spamming "am I in yet?" for 2-3 weeks after the initial rejection.

Edited, Mar 17th 2011 8:05pm by Rhodekylle
____________________________
In Chinese: glasses are yanjing; eyes are yanjing, and the beer of Beijing is Yanjing. When speaking, the difference is in the tones. Did I just order a glass of beer or a glass of eyes?
#10 Mar 17 2011 at 6:04 PM Rating: Good
***
2,607 posts
I don't have an issue with them not being premium members if they follow the other rules. I was a lurker for years. Maybe they could apply for consideration if they are poor students, or would that be an admin's nightmare?
#11 Mar 17 2011 at 6:14 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
1,955 posts
Quote:
Maybe they could apply for consideration if they are poor students


There are other sites. They don't have to post their survey here and it is something of an imposition for them to do so.

If everyone really wants to support surveys, one alternative would be to create a database for the common, unbiased questions. Many of the surveys rehash the same thing over and over. Do one survey of the user base, maybe dangle a minor reward, and then let the survey monkeys comb through that.
____________________________
In Chinese: glasses are yanjing; eyes are yanjing, and the beer of Beijing is Yanjing. When speaking, the difference is in the tones. Did I just order a glass of beer or a glass of eyes?
#12 Mar 17 2011 at 6:59 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,538 posts
I actually don't mind surveys myself, so long as they get admin approval. The 1 post wonder "come fill out my survey!" people can get annoying though.

I'm also in favor of the "No, we're not addicted to video games. Go away." part.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#13 Mar 17 2011 at 7:08 PM Rating: Excellent
I approve of the proposed new terms. I think that the premium membership requirement is especially nice, since most of the unapproved drive-by surveys will be instantly identifiable as such.

I would approve even more if the answer to survey permission requests was always "no". Smiley: wink
____________________________
Furlis - 80 Gnome Rogue - Terokkar

Trylofer wrote:
I'm still waiting for the "head slap over the internet" thingie to be developed. On that day, there will be lag, and lots of it.
#14 Mar 17 2011 at 7:20 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,089 posts
Maybe add that the surveys need to be composed in a somewhat grammatically proper fashion?

No questions like " wat kinda l337 gearz do you gots?"

____________________________
SSubZero wrote:

MNK: "OK we're gonna go in and get those items."
WHM: "Did you have a plan?"
MNK: "Plan? I was going to walk through the front door and start punching people."
#15 Mar 17 2011 at 7:21 PM Rating: Good
Is the 1 survey every 7 days, per ZAM or per game?
#16 Mar 17 2011 at 7:29 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
27,413 posts
idiggory wrote:
Of course, it isn't like we can actually KNOW if they did it or not.
I'm willing to bet that's why they settled on the premium thing.
Niakohr wrote:
So you want only students posting surveys. Everyone who posts surveys must be a premium member. This seems like quite a contradiction to me because every student I know wouldn't have extra money to spend on a premium membership.
They'd only have to buy a short term premium, right? 3 months is what, something like $10-15 if you're only getting that shorter term membership? If they can't find a way to pony up that kind of money for their survey, then they can find another site, IMO.

Hey, Kao, any way to flag a poster as "This week's approved survey" so they're instantly recognizable?

Edited, Mar 17th 2011 7:30pm by Poldaran
____________________________
Someone on another forum wrote:
Wow, you've got an awesome writing style.! I really dig the narrator's back story, humor, sarcasm, and the plethora of pop culture references. Altogether a refreshingly different RotR journal (not that I don't like the more traditional ones, mind you).

#17 Mar 17 2011 at 8:47 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,309 posts
I'd also say make an exception on premium for existing forum members with over 6 months and/or 1000 posts. If someone is already an active member of the community and just happens to be doing a project for class, they should be given the opportunity to post their stuff, assuming they meet all the other requirements.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#18 Mar 17 2011 at 8:52 PM Rating: Good
Yeah on the one hand I think having to pay for premium to post a survey is a bit excessive. On the other hand, they can always choose to pay for the $10/3 month premium, which isn't that much. So I'd say I'm leaning more towards being okay with the premium thing.

I'm definitely supportive of the automatic denial of gamer addiction surveys. Surveys are annoying enough as it is, I don't need to be patronized too.
____________________________
Proudmoore US server:
Popina, 90 Priest
Digits, 86 Shaman
Thelesis, 85 Mage
Willowmei, 85 Druid
Necralita, 85 DK
Shrika, 72 Warlock
Jaquelle, 54 Paladin
Grakine, 32 Hunter
The MMO-Zam's FB group. Please message me first so I know who you are.
#19 Mar 17 2011 at 9:03 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,286 posts
Can we rewrite the whole thing to just say **** off with your surveys"?
____________________________
Server: Midgardsormr
Occupation: Reckless Red Mage

IcookPizza wrote:

I think RDM's neurotic omniscience is sooooooo worth including in any alliance.
#20 Mar 17 2011 at 10:28 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Requiring premium membership is absurd; limiting gaming addiction as a topic is roughly equally absurd.

I realize most people are ok with this because they can't appreciate the academic repercussions and to them it's merely a nuisance, but as long as surveys are clearly labeled they don't have to click them.

Requiring permission and deleting offenders should be more than sufficient.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#21 Mar 17 2011 at 11:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,875 posts
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:

Hey, Kao, any way to flag a poster as "This week's approved survey" so they're instantly recognizable?

Likely not easily.

catwho wrote:
I'd also say make an exception on premium for existing forum members with over 6 months and/or 1000 posts. If someone is already an active member of the community and just happens to be doing a project for class, they should be given the opportunity to post their stuff, assuming they meet all the other requirements.


Good idea. The intent of the wording change is to make it more difficult for those 1 post wonders to drop by and post a survey. Especially the same old "do you game because you are depressed friendless sociopathic monster, or a REALLY depressed friendless sociopathic monster" surveys, which get old. I think very few people here would have a problem with filling out a survey for a forum member who has contributed too the forum.

The premium requirement is more of a way to garuntee they are at least contributing something towards the forum. I know most college students are broke. I don't really care. I figure that if its important enough to them to get the data, if people know that they had to contribute to the forum, they would be more likely to actually fill out the survey, not less.

I agree that the academic repercussions are not entirely fair, however the surveys dealing with "gaming addiction" are being done to death. I swear we have had an identical survey submitted here at least 3 times. Thats not good scholarship, thats just lazyness.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#22 Mar 17 2011 at 11:31 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,875 posts
Additional changes posted above.

Regarding a seperate survey forum, I just don't think it would get any traffic at all. Which would essentially be the same thing as telling all survey posters to go away.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#23 Mar 17 2011 at 11:53 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
27,413 posts
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:

Hey, Kao, any way to flag a poster as "This week's approved survey" so they're instantly recognizable?

Likely not easily.
How about keeping a sticky somewhere with a listing of approved surveys by date that we could easily reference? You could instruct the survey poster to link to that sticky to verify to us quickly and easily that they've been approved.
____________________________
Someone on another forum wrote:
Wow, you've got an awesome writing style.! I really dig the narrator's back story, humor, sarcasm, and the plethora of pop culture references. Altogether a refreshingly different RotR journal (not that I don't like the more traditional ones, mind you).

#24 Mar 17 2011 at 11:55 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
5,159 posts
I honestly can't see why this is a necessary thing to begin with. Sure, survey posters get annoying, but it's not like they're completely overrunning us. Just report the ones that haven't been approved and let an admin take care of it, which is bound to be less of a pain in the **** than this new, complicated system. Besides, we're hardly knocking important threads off of the front page with survey threads, even in the busiest forums around here.
#25 Mar 18 2011 at 12:08 AM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
eiran wrote:
Maybe they could apply for consideration if they are poor students
If the survey is for school, like most of them say it is, then the price of admission is a small price to pay. Most research projects tend to pay their volunteers, and this is (supposed) to be about research. Although, I thought the money should be used for charity instead of site maintenance, but whatever.

Edited, Mar 18th 2011 2:10am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#26 Mar 18 2011 at 12:11 AM Rating: Good
Sage
****
5,431 posts
I honestly think the original rules, for the most part, covered it pretty well.
I do like the note about content, and I like the limiting of one survey/time, but other than that, it really seems like there were enough hoops to jump through for people conducting them.

They still have to get admin approval for content, and users always have the option of participating or not. There's nothing stopping admins from turning down the ridiculous ones, or people choosing not to take part because of something they don't agree with, or whatever.
It also seems a bit silly to need to belong to a group already in order to get the information you need, in my opinion. Many surveys are going to require a lot of participants, and it seems a little excessive to require the person conducting the survey to be a member for a long period of time, or have a certain number of posts under their belt.

More strict rules about narrowing down content or filtering out junk BEFORE submitting it to an admin would be fine. The stuff after seems a bit far, though, in my opinion.

I am only thinking of how frustrating it would be to be on that end of this. Go to a site full of people who have all the information you need - a gathering place - and find all these roadblocks in place between you and the what you're looking for. Even after getting everything squared away with the survey and seeking approval for it, you need to pay and/or hang around for 3 months before you start? Personally, I'd hit the road and find my sources elsewhere. It has to be difficult enough to put these things together already (at least for the valid ones, which I would hope would be the only ones making it through the screening to start with).
But, as someone said, if you're going for "no surveys" here, or just discouraging their use, this is a good route to take. XD

Edited, Mar 17th 2011 11:16pm by AmanoJ
____________________________
~Phoenix / Figaro~
--
Little angel go away,
come again some other day.
The devil has my ear today,
I'll never hear a word you say.
#27 Mar 18 2011 at 1:36 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
4,584 posts
Quote:
I honestly think the original rules, for the most part, covered it pretty well.
I do like the note about content, and I like the limiting of one survey/time, but other than that, it really seems like there were enough hoops to jump through for people conducting them.

They still have to get admin approval for content, and users always have the option of participating or not. There's nothing stopping admins from turning down the ridiculous ones, or people choosing not to take part because of something they don't agree with, or whatever.
It also seems a bit silly to need to belong to a group already in order to get the information you need, in my opinion. Many surveys are going to require a lot of participants, and it seems a little excessive to require the person conducting the survey to be a member for a long period of time, or have a certain number of posts under their belt.


This, really. Some legit student may actually be looking for gaming sites for information gathering, and would be completely turned away with the new rules. I think there should be a tighter leash around them popping up, but I don't think that is the answer.
____________________________
Hume male, Zafire, Server: Sylph
50DNC, 50SMN, 50BRD, 50SAM, 50DRG, 50WHM, 52THF, 52COR, 52MNK, 58BST, 60WAR, 67PLD, 69PUP, 75RNG, 75SCH, 75BLM, 80NIN, 80DRK, 85BLU, 85RDM
Retired since February 2011.
All SJ's capped for LVL99!

#28 Mar 18 2011 at 4:20 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
27,182 posts
The main problem with most of the surveys is that they're so badly done and unoriginal.
I'd have no issue with filling out an interesting survey but if it's only questions like "how much do you play" "has it affected your real life" and more of that which looks like it's been thrown together in half an hour, if that.


Case in point, the one about some clothing designer sort of person who posted a survey, I thought it had a lot of potential as a survey about people's opinion on geardesign in games is original but instead there were just a few very standard questions.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#29 Mar 18 2011 at 12:31 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
523 posts
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
A survey may only be posted by someone with premium membership or at least 500 posts and or 3 months active posting in the forums. Exceptions may be made for anyone willing to donate to charity instead of purchaseing premium, however proof of donation would be required.

This addressed my concerns. I was worried about the actual contributors to the forum who would have been excluded because they couldn't pay for premium. I have no problem with people who are not part of the community having to pay for premium.



Purchasing is misspelled.
#30 Mar 18 2011 at 12:49 PM Rating: Decent
******
21,717 posts
I dislike random surveys as much as the next poster, but this seems a bit... draconian. Doesn't affect me either way though, so whatever.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#31 Mar 18 2011 at 3:42 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,875 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
I dislike random surveys as much as the next poster, but this seems a bit... draconian. Doesn't affect me either way though, so whatever.


It is. my thought was to put together the most restrictive ruleset and then adjust it based on feedback here.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#32 Mar 18 2011 at 4:04 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
The main problem with most of the surveys is that they're so badly done and unoriginal.
I'd have no issue with filling out an interesting survey but if it's only questions like "how much do you play" "has it affected your real life" and more of that which looks like it's been thrown together in half an hour, if that.


Case in point, the one about some clothing designer sort of person who posted a survey, I thought it had a lot of potential as a survey about people's opinion on geardesign in games is original but instead there were just a few very standard questions.


If the survey is for research purposes, the same standard questions can have different implications, and at the very least the standard questions are required anyway. It's pretty typical that most of the questions are gathering demographic data while only one or two questions address the thing being studied. It may not make the survey very interesting to take, but it's still useful.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#33 Mar 18 2011 at 11:16 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
1,955 posts
Quote:
It may not make the survey very interesting to take, but it's still useful.


Well, it would be if the survey itself were useful. Too many of them are academic **** to allow everyone in the process to claim that the person completed a thesis. Very rarely, one comes along and there is a real reason they are researching MMOs, one can often see that in the way they handle things. Those posters seem to get fairly positive feedback; however, the flocks of idiots are enough to discourage one from feeling overly helpful.

Thin out the idiots and everyone, including the survey posters, will be likely to have a better experience.

Quote:
It is. my thought was to calm down some of the folks on WOW General so that I don't have to keep locking threads they've linked to sites like that **** bleaching one.


He was too polite to say it.

Quote:
Case in point, the one about some clothing designer sort of person who posted a survey,


I would say that was one of the academic **** ones.

____________________________
In Chinese: glasses are yanjing; eyes are yanjing, and the beer of Beijing is Yanjing. When speaking, the difference is in the tones. Did I just order a glass of beer or a glass of eyes?
#34 Mar 19 2011 at 3:12 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
27,182 posts
Rhodekylle wrote:
Quote:
Case in point, the one about some clothing designer sort of person who posted a survey,
I would say that was one of the academic **** ones.
Very much so, shame too since it had potential to be interesting.

And I know the surveys need the standard questions in it, but when they have nothing but the standard questions, often badly phrased and riddled with grammar and spelling errors it kind of shows a complete lack of effort from the survey poster and that's what annoys me.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#35 Mar 19 2011 at 6:59 AM Rating: Good
I'd say if the email address is .edu (or some international equivalent) and the link doesn't have a virus, green light it. If the survey is foolish, or not useful, then the karma system will take care of the rest.
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#36 Mar 19 2011 at 10:27 PM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,051 posts
Lubriderm the Fussy wrote:
I'd say if the email address is .edu (or some international equivalent) and the link doesn't have a virus, green light it. If the survey is foolish, or not useful, then the karma system will take care of the rest.


To be honest, this site is meant to be a fansite, not a data pool for random academics with surveys.

And while the latest surveys have been kinda nice (as in: I didn't moan when I read the questions), they're still little more than advertisement. They're not trying to sell us a boob job or a thousand gold, but they still want us to click a link and their relevance to the site in general is minimal.

I understand the need for surveys and stuff (I did some myself a couple of months back), but there are other ways to do them than to dump a link on a fansite. It's not like blocking surveys from ZAM will cripple the academic world.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#37 Mar 20 2011 at 1:42 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
27,413 posts
It's not important really, but I'm kinda curious as to how that poll breaks down by game forum the respondents frequent.
____________________________
Someone on another forum wrote:
Wow, you've got an awesome writing style.! I really dig the narrator's back story, humor, sarcasm, and the plethora of pop culture references. Altogether a refreshingly different RotR journal (not that I don't like the more traditional ones, mind you).

#38 Mar 21 2011 at 1:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Spankatorium Administratix
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
1oooo posts
I didn't read the entire thread, too sick, sorry. Since Kao deals with the survey stuff anyway, I don't see why he couldn't post the ones he approves, that way you know he approved it. And if it gets posted by a user, you know it didn't. Just a thought, don't kill me Kao!
____________________________
ZAM: Support FAQ | Forum FAQ | Forum Rules | Mobile
DF: Twitter | FB
KnotKrazy: FB | Etsy
#39 Mar 25 2011 at 12:38 PM Rating: Good
Muggle@#%^er
Avatar
*****
19,768 posts
I'm doing an approved study right now, and it started out fine--questions about how we interact with guildies/what role they play in our emotional lives, etc.

Then, a few pages in, it's all about how depressed we are, whether or not WoW has ruined our lives, etc. Fine, I get it--you want to know the situation of the person who's giving you these responses. You need to know if they rely totally on their guildies because they've lost all their RL friends. Fine. But one or two questions would suffice for those purposes (example: "Do you feel that you spend too much time playing games?" and "Have you had to make sacrifices in your personal life to play games?"). You only spend 3 pages of survey questions asking about that if you are actually studying it. And it's getting old.

I say surveys that make slight references to gaming addiction are fine--it's likely necessary to evaluate their results if they are asking about things like interpersonal relations and gaming. Anything spending a large amount of time on it shouldn't be approved.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#40 Mar 26 2011 at 8:11 PM Rating: Decent
Internet Footsie Lawyer
*****
12,846 posts
My thoughts are that if they are doing an approved study they should send Kaolian a copy of their IRB or their instructors information so he can verify that it is class related and APPROVED.
____________________________
>.> heheheheh I am DF's sockpuppet.
rachelravage.us (somewhat NWS website)
http://www.guytalon.com/linger15.html My freeze Fetish DVD, on sale now! (WORK SAFE!)
http://venasevildolls.blogspot.com/ NWS
Niobia will establish a charity for orphaned mooses. (meese?) - Kao
ElneClare wrote:
So grow up folks and don't post anything you don't want your child to read. Doesn't matter if they are in diapers or adults, if it can upset them or you then it shouldn't be posted.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 41 All times are in CDT
Bijou, lylelovits, Mazra, Anonymous Guests (38)