h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hi Ben

Thanks for the links you gave in the Atelier - you're right to think that the ELC is in the same line of research as I am. I come across Amy Bruckman's work all the time (I'm on several mailing lists in which she is a very active participant) and I would imagine there's a fair chance she's come across my name too. She may even be aware of the original Amy the Ant project.

I haven't had time to check all the relevant threads but these are my thoughts so far:

The ELC is a major player in the field and Amy Bruckman is a well respected academic. I'm sure Amy's students mean no harm (in as far as any of us can ever give guarantees about our students) and h2g2 Researchers who choose to do telephone interviews probably won't regret it. However, I wouldn't give them my personal details because it isn't unusual for students to be unaware of the need to protect subject's personal data - to forget to shred their rough drafts, for example.

As to the wisdom of their methodology... Well, my opinion is that their approach is a bit of a cheek and I can see how it might annoy the dna staff. The staff can't possibly check out every research group that comes along to make sure they're safe and so the default response has to be to treat every group with extreme caution.

Most importantly, I can't imagine how any research question could be fairly addressed using the unrepresentative sample their methodology has thrown up but perhaps that's one of the teaching points Professor Bruckman wants to make. However, I think she should have made an approach to the Italics before sending her students.

If I can find the time, I'll try to have a chat (on h2g2) with some of the students to get a clearer idea of what it is they're trying to do.

The thing that has infuriated me about the reaction to these guys is that it is very difficult to work out how to identify and contact the Italics, and that by contrast the students have made it very easy for people to check them out, and then *they* are being assumed to be acting inappropriately. I cannot be bothered to check enough of the backlog to work out if anyone has actually slandered them; but they have certainly been slandered by inference if not directly.

I just loathe double standards, and double standards have been applied to these guys. I also suspect that egos will get in the way of people saying "ooops, you're right, they do check out, it's a big bad internet out there and sometimes the best of us overreact, sorry".

I am also truly not sure whether or not it should be part of the Italics remit to comment one way or the other on the appropriateness or quality of this sort of project. If they never either endorse nor condemn then they can simply say "be careful", which they do already. If they start to condemn groups then, by inference at least, they will have to endorse others, and that *is* a slippery slope.

What is the fundamental difference between Dancing Buddha inviting people to participate in his post-grad research and you inviting people to comment on the online learning apps you develop, or me inviting people to comment on websites I have built or on poetry I have written? The only fundamental difference I can see is that these guys are doing it in a responsible and auditable way.

The long and the short of it is that it is a free internet, and so long as people adhere to the ts and cs of the site, then it's an open forum. I cannot use it to conduct political campaigns, or solicit money for charity, (I had my name modded for that one), so it is arguable that it should not be used to request help with academic research, but that would require a change to the ts and cs which I devoutly hope is never ever made. But that is a slippery slope. Would my 'poetry' thread be shut because I am soliciting commentary on poems posted offsite? Then why not shut down the AWW? And as I kinda said to Mina, would it be offensive for someone to post an unsolicited comment on an offsite poem on my page?

My personal opinion is that there has been a lot of unconsidered and hasty reaction to these guys, and the reaction has been based not on the reality of who and what they are and how they have behaved, but on previous events some of which didn't even happen on this site.

This is the equivalent of accusing someone of being a terrorist because there was a smell of curry coming from their side of the street. Ok, it isn't, but you can see the point I am making about haste and injustice.

Bell. Pavlov. Hungry dog. Of *course* I've dived into this one!

Ben

I'm sorry Ben, I don't have the time to have a point by point discussion on this today. Suffice it to say that I find myself disagreeing with nearly everything you've said in Post 2. But we do have a tendency look at the world in very different ways. Something to dwell on over a , perhaps.

Shame. I love being disagreed with by people whose thinking I respect, that way I learn things and change my mind. I am curious what you think because academic research is your area and very much not mine. Tant pis. Another time!

Ben