From: ahmed-shakil@cs.yale.edu (Shakil Waiz Ahmed)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh
Subject: Re: My objections to the survey... (just an opinion)
Date: 6 Nov 1992 14:13:51 -0500
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven, CT 06520-2158
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: curie.systemsy.cs.yale.edu


In article <1992Nov6.180158.10903@vela.acs.oakland.edu>, mkaziz@vela.acs.oakland.edu (KHALED AZIZ) writes:

> my reasons for abstaining.  He has asked me to voice my objections
> publicly, and thus I will do so.  Personally, I would have been happy
> keeping my reservations to myself and simply not participating, but
> since I have been asked to post them, I shall do so.
> 
>         Shakil, the context you've presented is deceiving.  And I will quote
>         from your mail to explain :
>    
>         You wrote:      
>         In short, these are some of my reasons for not participating in the
>         survey.  Note that I didn't post an article on it, because I did not
>         want you to feel that I am encouraging others to join hands with me,
>         because I'm not.
> 
>         You sounded like you were doing us a big favor by not posting it.  
>         So I wrote:
>                 (quote) I wouldn't mind talking about it in the net. Or if 
>                 you want we can talk about it after the project is completed.
> 
>         Your response was:
>         Whatever you like.  If you want me to, I can state my opinions in
>         public, but I don't think that would be good for survey.
> 
>         Again, you were suggesting that you could do a big damage to the
>         survey by stating your opinion in public.  I thought most of
>         the readers are looking at the survey just as a simple survey,
>         nothing more.  No way it was going to hurt the survey if
>         you posted your opinion.  So in my last mail I said: Go ahead and
>         post it in the net if you want to.  Note I never forced you
>         to post your opinion.  In your intro you sound like a 
>         "good boy" listening to his parents, and that is not the case.

The notorious nitpicking syndrome again...  Of course nobody *forced*
me to post it -- the only thing one *has* to do in life is die!  All I
said is that you requested me to post it, and I obliged.  No word of
forcing or model child behavior.

>         Misrepresentation of facts can't be considered POLICEPERSON 
>         like conduct 

Interesting that you should say that considering that you took the
liberty of quoting from personal mail without first asking me.

> Shakil writes:        
> 
> SCB is a free forum for anyone to post what they like.   It isn't
> meant as a news service, nor as an entertainment center.  It's simply
> a bulletin board.  How often does one conduct surveys of bulletin
> boards?
> 
>         I don't know about others but to me SCB is lot more than just 
>         an electronic bulletin board.  In a way it constitutes my social 
>         life.  It is my only means to keep in touch with my culture, and I
>         want to know about the people who belongs to my social network. 
>         I think a lot of readers share my view.  So far the response rate
>         isn't bad at all.How often does one conduct surveys is irrelevant 
>         here.  Maybe nobody came-up with the dea before.  Is there any 
>         rule against it?

I distinctly remember stating that the people conducting the survey
have every right to do so.  All I am saying is that I don't want to
participate for the reasons I mentioned.  Regarding what you say about
SCB being more than an electronic bulletin board is technically just
plain wrong.  It is a newsgroup just like every other.  The fact that
you make your social life out of it is clearly a problem that *you* have
to deal with.  If you want to know about the people on the net, the
best way to do so would be to request people to get in touch with you
informally.  An official survey of the nature you posted is unlikely
to reveal anything interesting about the *people* on the net you want
to know about.  I'm sure a lot of readers *do* share your view.  I
never claimed otherwise.  I merely stated *my* opinion, I don't claim
to speak for anyone else.

>         The survey is not trying to accomplish anything.  I don't understand
>         why are you looking at it from such a suspicious point of view.  
>         The only reason we are conducting the survey is we want to know.  
>         We are not going to say "this is what we found out" and have no 
>         intention to add "this is what the readers want".  

Great.  So the three of you are conducting this survey and you are
going to sit there grinning over the results.  What's the point?  You
may not make anything of it and be doing this for your personal
amusement, but it may give off the illusion that there is some SCB
authority that monitors the group to which one can direct comments.

> More importantly, conducting a survey where one can specify ones
> gripes and likes gives off the illusion that there is an authority to
> whom one can direct such comments.  There isn't, and that wouldn't be
> in the spirit of an unmoderated newsgroup.  I basically object to any
> kind of bureaucratization of SCB.
> 
>         Why do you have to make things complicated for no reason?  

Excuse me, but I think I just gave a reason.  I don't think the above
is particularly complicated, and I would be much happier if you could
address the comment itself rather than asking an irrelevant rhetorical
question to divert attention from the issue.

> Surveys are useful if they can be employed to improve upon something.  
> 
>         The primary purpose of any survey is to reveal facts, 
>         not improving something.

So what facts do you hope to gather from this that aren't otherwise
available?  And, having collected these "facts," what do you intend to
do with them?

> Over email, Khaled told me that the survey will help answer the
> question as to what SCB is.  The question of what SCB is, should not
> be something up for debate.  It *is* a newsgroup just like every other
> for the simple reason that *anyone* can post to it.  It was created in
> the same manner as every other unmoderated newsgroup and there is
> nothing that distinguishes it from that.
> 
>         Except for its name of course, which suggests that this newsgroup
>         has some relationship to an entity called Bangladesh.  And anybody
>         with some degree of common-sense would conclude that the Bangladesh 
>         and related issues are discussed here.  Everybody knows SCB is an 
>         electronic bulletin board and may be to you that is all what it is.  
>         But SCB sure does have some degree of difference with other groups.  
>         SCB's readers have some distinct characteristics.  They are either 
>         Bangladeshis or the people who has some interest in Bangladesh.  
>         So SCB does have a secondary identity and the survey is an attempt 
>         to know more about this identity.

And the same people with this "degree" of common sense will also know
that an unmoderated newsgroup means anyone can post anything to the
group.  Yup, that means I could post an article about underwater
basketweaving in the Bahamas if I wanted to.  That's just the way
USENET is structured.  That's why you get articles by people like
dave@ttd.teradyne.com.  Do you think he has an interest in Bangladesh?
Now tell me, what is it about your survey that is going to reveal this
unique identity of SCB readership?  Clearly, as the daily flow of
articles show, SCB has a wide variety of individuals with very diverse
opinions.  What can a survey tell me beyond that?

> If you want an estimate of
> the readership, you can read news.lists and get a very good estimate
> with more statistics than any survey is going to give you.  As for who
> reads it, again in a forum like SCB, people have the right to be
> silent readers, and they will be unlikely to reply.  Those who want to
> communicate, post anyway, and so you see who they are.  For me, SCB is
> a WYSIWYG system! (What You See Is What You Get)
> 
>         We are not forcing anybody to respond to the survey.  Sure we're 
>         trying to motivate everybody to participate in it but the final 
>         choice is up to the individual.  I don't know how we are violating 
>         the rights of individuals to remain silent readers.  We are not 
>         asking them to post their responses in the net, are we?   

I don't understand this at all.  I never said that you're violating
rights of any individuals.  In fact, I clearly stated that you have
every right to conduct this survey!

> In short, my main objection is that an organized survey gives off the
> illusion of a controlling authority behind SCB.  Yet the people who
> are conducting the survey cannot implement any changes based on the
> result.  
> 
>         And they don't have any intention to change anything!

Two problems with this:

1) Then what's the point?
2) It still gives off the illusion of an SCB authority

-- Shakil Ahmed
=======================================================================
Dept. of Computer Science     INTERNET: ahmed-shakil@cs.yale.edu
P.O. Box 2158, Yale Station   BITNET  : ahmed-shakil@yalecs.bitnet
New Haven, CT 06520-2158      UUCP    : {ucbvax,harvard,...}!yale!ahmed
=======================================================================

Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh