|
Hi Michael
Thanks for your detailed questions. Since we are being candid: it would have been great
if these questions had been raised ahead of the survey going live. We reached out to different parts of Debian for this very purpose, advising of the survey's upcoming launch and that we had set up a test site so people could try it out and provide feedback,
and Donald N. reposted this message to Project.
The reason I mention this is that now the survey is live and people have started answering,
I am unsure to what extent we can safely modify it without compromising it. In any case I am not doing this alone so will share with the research team, we will assess if anything should / can be changed and respond later.
cheers
Mathieu
From: Michael Lustfield <michael@lustfield.net>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 6:12
To: Mathieu O'Neil <mathieu.oneil@anu.edu.au>
Cc: debian-project@lists.debian.org <debian-project@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: Fresh thread - 2023 Debian Project survey: Sustainability
[You don't often get email from michael@lustfield.net. Learn why this is important at
https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
> From: Mathieu O'Neil <mathieu.oneil@anu.edu.au>
> [...]
> https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="">
I'm sure there is sincere interest/effort behind this, so it's probably worth
sharing candid/open concerns/perceptions for a few of these questions.
> What is the name of the firm(s)/organisation(s) you work for?
(1) If you prefer to maintain anonymity, it would be helpful to phrase the
question in a way that ensures anonymous responses. Keep in mind that
individuals working in larger companies may feel comfortable sharing their
information, while those in smaller companies may choose to disregard this
question to maintain their anonymity. Considering privacy concerns, it is
possible that participants who value their privacy may choose not to continue
with the survey. Have you considered the potential impact on data accuracy if
some respondents choose not to answer? Is there a risk of skewing the results
towards participants who are willing to share their information? It's important
to avoid unintentional bias, similar to certain US political polls that adopt
questionable tactics.
In the future, consider checkboxes for industry type; avoid
self-identification responses unless relevant to the survey.
> Do you think the risk posed by predatory practices such as free-riding (entities benefiting from code development without contributing anything in return) to Debian's long-term sustainability is:
(2) When considering the risk presented by predatory practices, such as
free-riding, to Debian's long-term sustainability, it is important to ensure a
clear understanding of the term "free-riding" and its implications. This
question seems to provide a specific definition of free-riding and uses it as
an example of predatory practices. However, it may inadvertently imply that
free-riding is inherently detrimental to Debian. It is crucial to remember that
the question ultimately addresses the impact of predatory practices as a whole.
You may want to clarify if you believe every company utilizing open source
software is considered free-riding unless they contribute financially to every
volunteer or project involved. It is worth considering the potential
implication that end users are viewed as predators due to their use of FOSS in
their devices.
> Do you think the risk posed by predatory practices such as appropriation to FOSS's long-term sustainability is:
(2b) This is literally the first time I have heard of FOSS being implicated
with appropriation. I didn't even find anything that was in the same ballpark
after about a minute of search queries. I even asked AI and it struggled--are
you describing the act of a company repackaging an open source project as a
custom solution? Such as a company providing a "Managed IDS" which is really
just Snort with a tiny handful of their custom rules? or a company like
Tailscale offering solutions for wireguard?
> State/public support models to support volunteer work (e.g. granting of social rights to long-term contributors) need to be developed and implemented.
(3) Is this question seriously asking if it's the responsibility of government
to provide funding for volunteer-driven open source development? I hope I'm
misunderstanding that ... the implications are suited for a college-level
socioeconomics course.
> State/public models which provide financial support to everyone (e.g. Universal Basic Incomes or UBI) need to be developed and implemented.
(4) ... wait, are we still even talking about FOSS Sustainability?
> If an entity was shown by such a public campaign to be engaging in predatory practices such as free riding and/or appropriation, would that impact your willingness to work for them?
(5) This question seems to have a predetermined answer in mind, as it includes
a specific definition that could be used to manipulate the results. It is
similar to how politicians sometimes use tactics to distort poll outcomes to
support their own agenda.
There are countless recent examples, but the DHMO Study (dhmo.org) is close
enough, and much more entertaining to consider.
> How would you rate the proposal to prevent entities which engage in unsustainable environmental practices from using Debian, for example with a new "green open source licence"?
(6a) license* (6b) DFSG
> To what extent are you concerned about the environmental impact of FOSS?
(7) What you are looking to measure or compare? FOSS usage is vast, including
crypto mining, aerospace, pacemakers, cell phones, etc. How do compare FOSS
impact against closed (and other hybrid) source models?
> Section E: Demographics
(8) You really stressed anonymous, yeah? It doesn't matter if those fields are
optional; if you present it as anonymous, then don't ask for PII.
On Thu, 16 Nov 2023 10:38:06 +0000
Mathieu O'Neil <mathieu.oneil@anu.edu.au> wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Responding here to avoid more "thread hijacking"
>
> Exactly as in the 2016 edition, the survey has a combination of quantitative questions (which will enable the analysis of the community's evolution) and qualitative questions (which enable people to express their opinions about different issues, if they choose
to). Am I missing something?
>
> cheers
> Mathieu
>
> From: Michael Lustfield <michael@lustfield.net>
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 2:17
> To: Mathieu O'Neil <mathieu.oneil@anu.edu.au>
> Cc: debian-project@lists.debian.org <debian-project@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: 2023 Debian Project survey: Sustainability now open!
>
>
> I'm sure it wasn't the intention, but the questions presented in that
> survey feel more like they are phishing for specific
> people/information than curious about regular activities. It includes
> a number of open-ended questions with three text boxes for each,
> expecting the user to provide identifiable information. The wording
> also feels like there's a specific point that someone is trying to
> make, especially when it gets to "predatory practices."
>
> There is no chance you will get "useful" data (worth studying) from
> this survey, especially not with those questions. You could just as
> well be asking, "do you agree that predatory practices are bad? by the
> way, this includes being an end user."
>
> ________________________________
> From: Mathieu O'Neil <mathieu.oneil@anu.edu.au>
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 10:28
> To: debian-project@lists.debian.org <debian-project@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Fresh thread - 2023 Debian Project survey: Sustainability
>
> Hi all
>
> It was brought to my attention (thanks Gard) that by posting the announcement as a response to an email on EU regulation this polluted that other thread. I had assumed that changing the title of the email would create a new thread. Apologies for that, it
was an honest mistake. So - as requested - reposting the announcement below. I am aware someone has already commented about the survey, will respond in due course.
>
> cheers
> Mathieu
>
> =-=-=
>
> The 2023 Debian Project survey: Sustainability is now open!
> https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="">
>
> Thanks again to all the participants in the 2016 Debian Project survey. An astounding 1,479 people responded to this first edition. The 2016 survey results are available in an open-access report published in 2021: 2016 Debian Project survey: Work and volunteers,
available here:https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="">
>
> We (researchers Mathieu O’Neil, Sebastien Broca, Xiaolan Cai, Angela Daly, Molly de Blanc, Cecilia Rikap, Sebastien Shulz and Stefano Zacchiroli) are following up with a new survey, for three reasons.
>
> 1-We want to track the project’s evolution since 2016: what has changed, what remains the same when it comes to roles, contributor characteristics and the presence of paid work in the project.
>
> 2-We want to focus on the economic sustainability of Debian and FOSS, in the context of threats to openness posed by new mechanisms such as Software as a Service and potential threats to sustainability such as ‘free riding’. What should happen so that FOSS
projects continue to be maintained appropriately?
>
> 3-We are interested to find out what the community thinks about the environmental impacts of FOSS development, and possible ways to reduce these impacts.
>
> We want to hear from as many Debian contributors as possible—whether you've submitted a bug report, attended a DebConf, reviewed translations, maintained packages, participated in Debian teams, or are a Debian Developer. Completing the survey should take
10-20 minutes, depending on your current involvement with the project.
>
> About the survey:
>
> • We are using LimeSurvey, an online survey platform developed with free and open source code.
>
> • Survey responses are anonymous, IP and HTTP information are not logged, and all questions are optional. As it is still likely possible to determine who a respondent is based on their answers, results will only be distributed in aggregate form, in a way
that does not allow de-anonymisation.
>
> • The results of the survey will be analyzed as part of ongoing research work by the organizers. A report discussing the results will be published under a DFSG-free license and distributed to the Debian community as soon as it's ready.
>
> • The raw, disaggregated answers will not be distributed and will be kept under the responsibility of the organizers.
> We hope you will fill out the Debian Contributor Survey.
>
> The deadline for participation is: December 15, 2023.
> You can find the survey here:
> https://aus01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url="">
>
> If you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact us via email at:
> Mathieu O’Neil mathieu.oneil@canberra.edu.au
--
Michael Lustfield
|