Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Banea-Vaedr t1_iy9lw8a wrote

There are serious methodological flaws with this survey.

2

danster808 t1_iy9mk3o wrote

Hi, care to explain some of it's flaws? It's meant to be more of a perception survey to identify what people know and what their interests would be.

1

Banea-Vaedr t1_iy9ms1t wrote

Certainly. The questions don't include all the options they seem like they should, and don't have an option for "none".

Also, is Worcester the city, metro, or county?

2

danster808 t1_iy9nrb1 wrote

Thanks for your criticisms, I really appreciate it. Just included some of your suggestions!

1

Banea-Vaedr t1_iy9nuuz wrote

Does that mean I get an authorship credit?

1

danster808 t1_iy9pd3p wrote

I might sneak your username into the website somewhere, Thanks again for all your help!

2

Banea-Vaedr t1_iy9nzej wrote

Oh, also, and I should have included this, I'm not sure if you're aware but counties barely mean anything in Massachusetts

1

danster808 t1_iy9p324 wrote

Got you, I'll change it to city.

1

Banea-Vaedr t1_iy9pccp wrote

"Metro" would probably get you a cleaner outcome if you're looking for the people in the Worcester city area and adjacent communities. People from somewhere like Gardner might select themselves out.

1

danster808 t1_iy9q9bk wrote

True but the provisions trickle down through local government authority, so towns within the metro area would need their own administrators to submit grant applications.

1

Banea-Vaedr t1_iy9qd4t wrote

Then you want city, because the county abolished itself.

1