Amara Graps wrote:
> "scerir":
> >>It's not so interesting.
> I said:
> >I agree, but ...
>
> and I realized, as I hit the Send button, that my comment could
> be interpretted differently, in a negative way.
> I meant that a simple survey of basic stats was generally not
> so interesting (however it would be useful for our purposes).
Well now see Amara, thats the advantage of being such a nice
person: whenever we see goofs like this we always assume
that since it was you who posted, we interpret it postively. {8-]
Nowthen, if we manage to set up a website with anonymity
but have some kind of code to insure the same person doesnt
put up multiple entries, will persons be *more* inclined to tell
the truth, or less? Would an anonymous website be better or
worse than a questionaire given at the conference? spike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:44 MDT