On 12/5/2019 6:17 PM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
On 12/5/2019 3:58 PM, Mark Thomas wrote:
...
Not sure if this is the right venue. Feel free to redirect me.
Working my way through the survey, I'm finding that - for me at least -
it would be trivial to de-anonymise my response. It isn't going to
affect my answers but I wonder if it will affect the responses of others.
I'm not sure what could be done about this. We need the demographic data
but that combined with out relatively small population and relatively
detailed data available about each committer's activities makes
de-anonymisation easier.
I think this is something to file under "things to take into
consideration for the next survey" but I wanted to raise it while it was
fresh in my mind.
I have the same concern. One thing that can be done even now is to
establish a minimum size of group for which statistics will be broken
out for publication.
In a board@ thread, which I am staying away from, Dave Fisher remarked:
Elsewhere someone suggested that answers may be enough to impute who
filled in that set of answers. I would say those are well known board
members. The survey is out. Let’s analyze results in a couple
months.
Although inferring identity from one or two answers is probably limited
to a few board members, combinations can be very powerful. My survey
answers show that I am over-65, female, PhD, PMC and ASF member, UK
origin, US resident, and sometimes attend face-to-face meetings but not
often. That is probably not a very large demographic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: diversity-unsubscr...@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: diversity-h...@apache.org
