Mr. Muniz and Ms. Schau,
I think that the negative reaction some are having, myself included, with
the results of your study have more to do with the fact that we, as a group,
were being studied for the purpose of publication *without* our explicit
knowledge or permission than with your specific observations/conclusions.
Although our listserv is a semi-public forum for assistance and discussion
of the Newton, there is a considerable amount of discussion of off-topic
issues that is generally considered to be "among friends". A large core of
the participants have been in attendance for years, and are very familiar
("friends") with other group members, both new and old. And, generally,
"friends" do not compile these types of discussions for statistical or
psychological analysis, particularly for publication. Friends tend to
accept them at face value and move on to the next topic, whatever that may
be. The list members tend to think of these discussions as internal to the
group.
Therefore, the reaction to discovering that we are "being observed",
measuring our "consumer behaviors/modalities", and this is to be the subject
of an academic publication that is cited in the commercial media...well...to
say that I feel somewhat violated is an understatement. I think that the
collective consciousness that someone might be in the background measuring
our responses will color future interaction in this forum in a negative way,
a sad development.
Had you been up-front and announced to the group your intentions, and the
time-frame for your study, this might have been avoided, but...
Regards,
Gary
-----Original Message-----
From: newtontalk-bounce_at_newtontalk.net
[mailto:newtontalk-bounce_at_newtontalk.net]On Behalf Of Albert Muniz
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 11:05 AM
To: newtontalk_at_newtontalk.net
Subject: [NTLK] Reactions to Wired Article * from Mun iz and Schau
Reactions to Wired Article from Muniz and Schau
Just wanted to check in. We've read some of the responses to the story on =
our research and were somewhat taken aback.
It seems our study on, and our opinion of, the Newton community, is being =
misunderstood. Some appear to be misunderstanding what Leander Kahney =
(the Wired author) said about our study and what we said ourselves in the =
study. Please allow us to clarify a few points. =20
We never suggested that the community is the only reason people keep using =
the Newton. We believe that the community makes it ~easier~ to use the =
Newton (you can continue using them because the community facilitates it). =
We admire the ingenuity displayed by members of the community in keeping =
the devices going. It is a great resource, but we do understand that the =
ultimate reason why you use the Newton is because it is a solid piece of =
superior technology.=20
We never suggested that participation in the reintroduction rumors =
characterizes every member of the community. Obviously, there is =
variability. However, these rumors are the focus of a considerable amount =
of discussion, and there are several consistent patterns across incidents. =
As such, we feel that they do provide some indication of what is going on =
in the community and what is important to some segment of its members. We =
~never~ said that all users take part in these discussions. In fact, we =
note that many members are quite skeptical of the rumors. There is a =
large amount of rationality in these discussions. But there is also a =
great deal of spirited discussion (recall the Jan. 02 discussions of the =
iWalk rumor). =20
We recognize the large numbers of moderate users, who don't create =
webpages, participate in rumor discussions or even regularly post to the =
listserv. We ~certainly~ do no believe that any of you are neurotic =
superfans with a blind devotion. =20
We also never said that the Newton was outdated and obsolete. All we =
suggested was that, the simple reality facing any discontinued manufactured=
device, is that as the devices get older, it will be increasingly =
difficult to find parts for them and keep them working.
We don't want to get too wrapped up in debating the meaning of every =
sentence in the article. Some measure of disagreement is inevitable among =
the many varied members of the listserv. Not everything we observe is =
going to apply to every member of the community. These are two realities =
facing anyone studying any group. =20
We do feel that it is important for us to note that we like (and respect) =
everyone we have met through the list. A lot. We have enjoyed learning =
about the Newton and the people who keep them going. It's a great group. =
Think about how quickly queries posted to the listserv are answered, and =
how thoroughly they are answered. Not too many groups can boast about =
that.=20
We are planning on posting the main points of our rumor study on our =
research website next week and would welcome any comments. Agree. =
Disagree. Or other.
Thanks much for your time and attention.=20
Sincerely,
Al Muniz
Hope Schau
-- Read the List FAQ/Etiquette: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Read the Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/ This is the NewtonTalk mailing list - http://www.newtontalk.net/-- Read the List FAQ/Etiquette: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Read the Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/ This is the NewtonTalk mailing list - http://www.newtontalk.net/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Sep 05 2002 - 10:05:56 EDT