![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/4199fb9f48185240cd3de461a14efa0f.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
The Lisp Questionnaire http://www.xs4all.nl/~alemmens/alu/questionnaire.txt is ineffective. If you look at the database of people who answered the Questionnaire http://www.xs4all.nl/~alemmens/alu/database/ you will see 235 replies. The first submission was made in June 2004. 226 of the submissions occurred in 2004. Only 8 in 2005. Only 1 in 2006, in January. And this is worldwide. That's PATHETIC. Since this resource is all but useless, and all but ignored, we should ask why. If we think surveys are important, we should do a proper one. And figure out what makes for a "proper" one, so that we don't end up with something equally pathetic. Some obvious things about what's wrong: - I'm not about to dig through a worldwide list of 235 people, one by one, to find out anything about them. It's an invitation to a big chore, with no promise that it's going to get me anything of value. Why would I look at such a list, compared to posting on comp.lang.lisp or some other forum where people will actually respond to my question? Even if crickets chirp, they chirp more quickly than digging through a list of random stuff. - If people were grouped by geographic location, I'd have a much stronger incentive to look at their stats. - If people were grouped by interests.... - If people were grouped by Lisp implementations.... - If groupings in general were searchable, like a proper database... - If the Questionnaire and Database were displayed on a website that had a certain level of professionalism, so that it appeared to be well maintained, well cared for, actively supported.... - If the database were simply much larger, so that it appeared to have value... - I'll wager no active effort is being made to get people to answer the survey. Either that or sporadic efforts were made, and the survey taker was too swamped to do anything with the results he got. So there is an infrastructure and automation issue here. Now, there may be a meta problem about whether anyone cares about these sorts of things. The last time I think I ever looked at a database of people's stats was probably on Gamasutra. That would have been 3 years ago, when I was sticking myself in there as a contractor and was curious what others were doing. I've never cared since. So my question is: - is there a site out there, for any language or technology, that demonstrates "best practices" for taking surveys and using the results to further some promotional goal? 'Cuz we should study that up. Cheers, Brandon Van Every
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/4c56e7360f8a133bda2dc814520f3bd3.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
The main reason as to *why* to fill out the questionnaire is so that it *does* become populated. Also, there is a fairly new effort within the Lisp Gardeners to turn that raw data into useful content. All the more reason to fill it out... The biggest issue with the Lisp "community" had been that historically, there had been no real consensus. That lack was what actually defined what it meant to be a lisper for a long time... but that's changing. We are part of this change-- as illustrated by the fact that within only a few days we have a growing mailing list, and no post has been made to any newsgroup yet. That is, YOU are part of the change! Thank you for helping to bring Lisp into the twenty-first century! -Daniel
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/4199fb9f48185240cd3de461a14efa0f.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Daniel Pezely wrote:
The main reason as to *why* to fill out the questionnaire is so that it *does* become populated.
That's a nice thought but 2 years has proven it ain't happenin', at least not in the current guise.
Also, there is a fairly new effort within the Lisp Gardeners to turn that raw data into useful content.
All the more reason to fill it out...
Not really. It's worthless until the useful content is displayed. Pitching that people help fix / beef up the content display is a good idea. Pitching that people fill out the form as it stands is a waste of time. Frankly, the form *reinforces* the myth that nobody's doing Lisp. If you take the Seattle promotion page seriously, I suggest you remove that "please fill this out" request, and instead point something at the "let's rearchitect this" request. Let's get people to focus on what matters and not make ourselves look stupid and crappy in the interim. The Gardeners page is ok. The Common Lisp Directory is good. The Questionnaire sucks. Side note: my God, www.python.org finally got a facelift! That could have happened 2 years ago. The resistance to that was very, very painful to deal with. It's part of why I moved on to other programming languages. I was on the marketing-python mailing list, helped get some draft logos together. After that fiasco, went and tried to do the same thing with OCaml. That didn't pan out either. Tried to help get Lisp + Scheme logos organized several months ago. It didn't work out. I wonder how the logjam on www.python.org finally got broken open, because it was a big one. I bet it took $$$$$$. Their logo is even decent, relying on principles of abstraction we went over 2 years ago. The idea was that realistic snakes freak too many people out, so we wanted snakes as an abstract graphical element only. Cheers, Brandon Van Every
participants (2)
-
Brandon J. Van Every
-
Daniel Pezely