Le lundi 20 août 2018 à 10:10:42-0500, Gunnar Wolf a écrit :
> Ian Jackson dijo [Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 04:33:46PM +0100]:
> > Asavaseri Natnaree writes ("Re: Research survey: Impact of Microsoft
> > Acquisition of GitHub"): > I am happy to announce that we are ready
> > to release preliminary results of the "Developer Perception to
> > Microsoft's acquisition of GitHub" survey. These results can be
> > accessed at "
> > https://naist-se.github.io/study-of-microsofts-github-acquisition/";. Again
> > thank you for your participation and please feel free to share or
> > discuss these results.
> >
> > I'm sorry to say that I think this is a poor piece of work.
> > (...)
>
> Hello Ian,
>
> I understand your frustration with the work shared with the author and
> other linked people. However, this is not the way to answer to
> somebody who is attempting to do a contribution to understand the
> social weather after an important change.
>
> The first part of your mail is... Maybe somewhat harsh (I would invite
> you to review the "ignoring negativity" panels at this last DebConf;
> that's not the communication pattern our project needs!), but this
> last paragraph is frankly... Frightening.
>
> > To debian-devel: Does someone here speak enough Japanese to find the
> > contact email address for someone at NAIST who will take reports of
> > potential problems with research ethics ?
>
> So, maybe Asavaseri is a student struggling with methodology? Maybe a
> researcher from a different field, who can use some correction in his
> ways for this subject? For that, we would all thank you for most of
> your mail.
>
> But with this paragraph, your mail turned into a _threat_. That is not
> something that should go down easily. I ask you not to pursue this
> path.
While Ian's way of saying things is quite brutal, truth is he makes his
point.
The piece of work done by Asavaseri Natnaree and their internship directors
is quite disappointing, especially when one knows that none of them did take
any time to reply/address the remarks that were done to them.
First, they didn't take into account the censorship people apply to
themselves regarding surveys hosted by a stalking platform.
Second, they cared more about the prettiness of their report than about its
accessibility and thoroughness. (it's funny that the work is published on
github, btw)
Third, there is no scientific method described in this presentation. (how
were the questions chosen, what is to be concluded from the answers, etc)
When one publishes "research" with a professor's and many assistant
professors' names in it, it seems plausible to assume that someone did
review the work. The fact that the outcome is quite poor is at best
worrying. Either they didn't give a single care to Asavaseri Natnaree's
work, or the "intern" should really consider doing an internship elsewhere.
Regards,
--
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature