<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Aug 25, 2022, 20:48 by social@rodrigo.digital:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div><br></div><div><br></div><div class="">On 25/8/22 10:11, Marc_marc wrote:<br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>for
example they continue to be done on closed platforms, which de <br></div><div> facto irritates some participants or even leads them not to
answer, <br></div><div> thus biasing the results (the less open-minded will not be
affected <br></div><div> by this criterion, the more strict on the use of open will
potentially be absent)<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>What are the possible solutions to this issue? <br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">Research involving survey gets better.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I would not expect it, most of such things are either<br></div><div dir="auto">protoscience or pseudoscience, and done by students <br></div><div dir="auto">with insufficient resources and shoestring budget.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">At least in this case it was not mass-send spam send<br></div><div dir="auto">via PM or to private email addresses, so was already above<br></div><div dir="auto">average of surveys I get.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It is not responsibility of OSMF to do this, and we have many<br></div><div dir="auto">higher-importance things to handle.<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If such platform would be maintained by OSMF it should be used<br></div><div dir="auto">for internal surveys only.<br></div> </body>
</html>