[Foundation-l] Attribution survey and licensing next steps

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/3/8 Milos Rancic <millosh at gmail.com>:
> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> For example, if the survey had shown community credit to be highly
>> desired and not controversial at all, that would be interesting: We
>> could have an informed conversation about whether we should try to
>> accommodate that model after all. As it is, it's the second most
>> popular first option, but with 15.29% ranking it as their
>> second-to-last option, it's also somewhat polarizing. A link to the
>> article, on the other hand, is the first or second option for more
>> than 60% of respondents, and the last or second-to-last option for
>> only 3.47%.
>
> Erik, this is not relevant because two options were non-options, so in
> the opposite case third-to-last is also relevant. (Even it was good to
> include them to realize how much Wikimedians care about their
> authorship.)

Indeed - you need to be very careful when analysing survey results.
Including non-options does provide extra information, but it means you
need to take care how you interpret things. Those two options ought to
be removed before calculating percentages in the way Erik has done.