Wizards - online survey problems
- Thread starter MerricB
- Start date
WayneLigon
Adventurer
Liavek! Obscure, hah!CCamfield said:(Obscure fantasy reference)If they know your birthday, and who you are, they can steal your luck!(/reference)
Very interesting magic system
Pielorinho
Iron Fist of Pelor
Moderator's Notes:
Jaws, if you think another poster is breaking the forum rules, report them. Do not respond with an insult. Insults tend to breed more insults, and then things just go the way of the tribbles.
Thanks!
Daniel
Jaws, if you think another poster is breaking the forum rules, report them. Do not respond with an insult. Insults tend to breed more insults, and then things just go the way of the tribbles.
Thanks!
Daniel
der_kluge
Adventurer
I took it. As far as polls is concerned, I thought it was just about worthless. I take polls all the time. I'm on a mailing list to do polls. I see all kinds of polls. I've even done market research in RL and gotten paid for it. So, I like to think I know what a good poll looks like. It's important to capture useful data.
But, this one was just worthless. First off, why the birthdate down to the day? Wouldn't an age category be just as useful? Most researchers don't ask "Of people that are 31.67 years old..." they ask "what kinds of games do kids in the 13-18 year old demographic playing?" An age range would have been suitable. It could have been granular 17-18, 19-20, or broad -13-18, 21-25, 26-30 but it's pretty much how all research is done.
Secondly, the "how many years have you been playing?" question. Really, are they going to separate those of us who have been playing 15 years versus ones who have been playing for 14 years? Give me a break. Plus, it's not an easy thing to really figure out. I had to stop and think about it. Problematic, too, since I played in 5th grade once, and then didn't really play for real until I was a junior. So, is that 15 years, or 20 years?
And then on the category of number of books owned they went TOO broad. 1-5 is way different than 6-10. I mean, you're comparing guys who own 10 books to guys who own 1. Dumb. Plus they already know this with the poll that asked which of the books you owned, and you could choose them individually. That was good, but there could have been more choices. I mean, Complete * was not listed, nor was UA, or the outer planes, or any number of books. Opportunity lost. I would have been happy to fill out every WoTC book I owned. Again, poor poll design.
Next time, they should just hire me and save themselves a ton of money..
But, this one was just worthless. First off, why the birthdate down to the day? Wouldn't an age category be just as useful? Most researchers don't ask "Of people that are 31.67 years old..." they ask "what kinds of games do kids in the 13-18 year old demographic playing?" An age range would have been suitable. It could have been granular 17-18, 19-20, or broad -13-18, 21-25, 26-30 but it's pretty much how all research is done.
Secondly, the "how many years have you been playing?" question. Really, are they going to separate those of us who have been playing 15 years versus ones who have been playing for 14 years? Give me a break. Plus, it's not an easy thing to really figure out. I had to stop and think about it. Problematic, too, since I played in 5th grade once, and then didn't really play for real until I was a junior. So, is that 15 years, or 20 years?
And then on the category of number of books owned they went TOO broad. 1-5 is way different than 6-10. I mean, you're comparing guys who own 10 books to guys who own 1. Dumb. Plus they already know this with the poll that asked which of the books you owned, and you could choose them individually. That was good, but there could have been more choices. I mean, Complete * was not listed, nor was UA, or the outer planes, or any number of books. Opportunity lost. I would have been happy to fill out every WoTC book I owned. Again, poor poll design.
Next time, they should just hire me and save themselves a ton of money..
Similar Threads
