Social Network Research

Please elaborate.

They don't need an e-mail address. They're marketing in game. I'm not talking about a spam mailing list. Don't think so narrow minded.

Its not opt in if other people can list my name. They don't need my input if everyone I know puts in their connection to me.

I don't believe so. They're looking for specific information regarding relationships in SL and how we connect to everyone. That doesn't serve a lot of purpose in the specific way they collect it.

it creates a social map of SL, and I'm pretty sure an avatar find isn't going to tell me how much you trust x person or y person.

This type of research used in the proper way could be one of the most powerful marketing tools to hit SL. Properly coached and set up individuals targetting certin people seen as influential to push products and ideas. Its a marketers wet dream.


if this is what they're referring to.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schutzstaffel

I'm not sure where they got that information from.

One does Not duscuss with the Rats the Purpose of the Maze they are being run through. With all due respect to Robin, I'm getting a Little Tired of every would-be Diane Fossey, and Margaret Meade Wannabe Trying to Use MY recreation time to Knock off a quick University Paper. Tell me, does Anyone REALLY Vet the credentials of these "Observers" and their studies?
I had one in TSO doing "Behavioural studies" Really Harm some of the people i Cared about there. Frankly, I'm Skeptical of anyone Claiming to represent that Field of "Science" while On Line.
Sorry, Not Interested, Take your Cheeze someplace Else.

Angel.

You're welcome to your opinion.


It so happens I co-own the land this little project is based on. I was approached very politely by Mynci through a mutual contact of ours.

Thusfar, I've seen plenty of tar-brushing, speculation, and FUD based on a handful of concerns that are valid. No one should need to be a lab rat, and in that sense, people do not need to participate in this. Privacy concerns are valid, and will be addressed as far as I can tell.

The handful of survey questions, which I ran through and read some time ago, weren't aligned with marketing purposes at all. "How much do you trust this person" is a long way from "how would you feel about this product."


If anyone here can prove nefarious purposes, do so. Until then, Mynci and her project keep the land for what I consider a valid study.


Thanks.

It might be a joke based on the initials SS for Social Sim.

As I said, stop being so narrowminded. They're not marketing with the survery, however once a social map is built it can be used to push products and other such things. Let me spell it out for you:

Using the "how much you trust person x" to build a social map allows you to selectively target inidviduals for marketing later. Using this you're able to idenitify the most trusted and most influential people in SL. Rather than a standard ad campaign you'd be able to use social engineering to spread the word about your product/service/website/etc

You've either got your head buried in the sand or somewhere else, but not everyone is so blind or ignorant as to whats going on.

As I said, people aren't given a choice when their relationships can be entered by others. You don't counter that by repeating the same pointless claim you made the first time.

You're welcome to your opinion, and you're welcome to do with your land what you want, that doesn't mean people have to remain silent about such an obviously unusual survery (and I've worked for a legitimate survery question. They'd NEVER ask such personal and specific information) which could be used for something quite the opposite of what it claims.

Would everyone "targeted for marketing" without their consent please stand up?

Bring me a claim with evidence backing it, and I'll look into it. Otherwise, case closed.

Jinstar, I am honestly not involved in marketing in any way. I am working on my own, with the backing of my University - University of Surrey - and my supervisors.

Aleks/Mynci

...is that your PHD paper is going to be totally skewed because of the numbers not replying...

Well obviously the study isn't done yet, how bloody clueless are you? "The germans are invading sir!" "are they on our soil?" "well no sir.. they're about a days march away, there is 400,000 of them, and they have several armored divisions" "Anyone currently being invaded stand up? no..okay, lets go back to tea".

last I checked you don't run the forums or SL so people can talk about what they like.



One thing I learned when I did legitimate survery work was you never asked for data you weren't going to use. The specifics of who we actually deal with and on what level in this simulation serves no legitimate scientific purpose, because you don't study specifics like that to draw conclusions about populations. Establishing trust levels between as many users as you can is only used for one purpose to draw a social map.

I agree! This seems to be a way to collect a list of all your SL friends, along with which your opinions on which ones like cybersex and which ones are easy to scam.

I'm rather annoyed at being spammed asking me to participate, mainly because I didn't think of it first! Imagine how much the compiled list will be worth to scammers and lonely people looking for some quick cyber loving.

Even if this is a legit survey, I don't think it's ethical to disclose personal information *of other people* without their informed consent. And I'm not going to all 100+ people on my firends list to ask if they mind.

*stands up*

I recieved unsolicted IMs asking my to partake in this marketting survey. Since it started with spam, so I'm not inclined to believe "it's not for marketting, here's a link to a student homepage and a myspace site to prove it!" just because some avatar I've never heard of says it is.

I've taken place in a bunch of SL research things before, but they were never initiated by someone spamming me and they never asked for detailed information about other people.

Mind sending me a log? I'd like to see that for myself.

1) This was unsolicted.

2) Despite trying to spin this as "research" it's blatent collection of personal detrails and marketing information.

If you received a RL phone call asking for a list of your friends, their contact details, their world views (including sexual preferences), and how gullible they are, what would you do? If you'd give the caller all the information they asked for then I am very glad I don't know you in RL.

Looks like you were a possible hub. The way I see it is the system identified you as a key individual and is seek your input to create a potentially crucial part of the social network map.
But hey this isn't marketing right? Why would you solicit information from a specific individual? Legitimate surveys are useless unless your respondents are random so why would they...oh....

This "survey" is a joke, and there is absolutely no way its being used for a legitimate purpose because it would be utterly useless as any kind of legitimate study.

That's all I needed to hear. While not the worst outcome, I'll take that up with Mynci myself.

Because unsolicited spam is not something I intend to promote.

I'll inform Chicken Little that you're contending for his job.

Not at all. Have you studied statistics? worked for a legitimate suvery company?
Your information collected is useless as any kind of study because it becomes biased when your respondents and polling isn't random. There are a number of acceptable ways to collect data, this isn't. If this was being used as legitimate material for a PhD, and being used in a report, and the school caught wind of the way the data was collected, I couldn't see them accepting it. They might as well invent the data, because its as reliable as the method used to collect it.

Any conclusions drawn from such data would be useless. There would be no way you could apply a model of that data to anything, or learn anything important from it.

Yes, at the college level. And while it wasn't my job description, I have done surveys and worked in academia before.


There is a degree of bias that would need to be adjusted for, yes. As is the same in any voluntary survey. Which begs the question. With all of what you've gone on to say, have you actually tried working through the survey? I can ask Mynci to arrange for a sample in PDF form, if you'd like.


Academia is, to the best of my understanding, far from perfect. In the places I've worked, this would be acceptable, believe it or else.

As for credibility, I decided to take a look at Mynci's Google hits and information, just to humor you. Mynci's site is hosted by a credible institution, the University of Surrey. And the publications all check out.


Other than the reported unsolicited message (which I have already contacted Mynci about), I still see nothing wrong here.

Yes, however bias attributed to trying to cherry pick your respondents isn't a legitimate bias to adjust for. You can't adjust for that. The moment you try to solicit specific respondents your data is dead. There is no other way to slice that.

School's never have commercial interests...not to mention that appears to just be webspace she's been given by the school, likely as part of being a PhD student. They probably don't endorse or police her content unless there are complaints.

I did the first one, that was enough to know this was no serious academic study.

I'm flattered! Someone thinks I'm important! *beams* I'm still not dobbing in all my friends though.



I'm pretty sure it's already been taken by someone from the Land and Economy forums.



On a more serious note, thank you very much Jeffrey; not only is it rare for someone to pay attention to evidence put forth in a forum debate, it's even rarer for them to evaluate it objectivly instead of just looking for some (any) reason it can be ignored.