Gunnar Wolf writes ("Re: Research survey: Impact of Microsoft Acquisition of
GitHub"):
> 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.
The points I made in my mail were made before, during participant
recruitment, and these "researchers" ignored them.
That suggests to me that that they are more interested in getting
their assignment done, than in producing useful research; and they
don't care whether that means their "research" misrepresents reality.
> 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.
Being excluded from this kind of research, and having our opinions
therefore ignored, and having that not at all acknowledged, is a
serious threat to the Free Software movement.
"Research" like this paints a distorted picture. That distorted
picture will form the basis of decisions which will harm our goals.
That the authors did not intend to take sides against me, does not
mean that they have not done so. They were warned about this problem
and have ignored it. Overall, their work is a hostile to me.
I agree that this was probably a student project. But they don't give
the details of their teachers - neither earlier, nor now. If they had
done, an appropriate response would have been to raise the matter with
the teachers.
What they are doing instead is publishing their work with their
university's name all over it, as if it were respectable piece of
academic work. Which it clearly isn't. It fails even the most basic
tests in presentation and content.
Ian.
--
Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
