On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 1:20 PM Georg Link <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Nov 6, 2019, at 2:19 PM, Justin Mclean <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hi Georg, > > > > Thanks for clearing up how that will work. > > > >> To send out invites through LimeSurvey, it requires creating a > “participant table”. > >> Every participant is assigned a token, to track whether the participant > responded or not. > >> Again, the responses are anonymous and no link between the participant > entry and the response is stored. > > > > I assume we know if the participant responded but can’t match that to an > individual response. That may not quite be as anonymous as some people > expect. > > To avoid tracking who responded I see two options, assuming we want to > send emails through LimeSurvey: > > Option 1: > We can send everyone the same URL with the same token from the dummy > participant. > > Option 2: > We can leave the survey open, without a participant table. Thus > eliminating the need for a token. > The invites are sent from a “dummy survey” that we don’t actually use but > instead we include the URL to the real survey. > No tokens, no tracking, full anonymity, to information about response rate. > > Option 3: Build a participant table and send with separate tokens per participant, but don't record the correspondence (that let's us avoid duplicate submissions for committers). At the same time, run a separate (but with identical questions) survey for social media with no tokens to allow wide spreading. This allows us to compare the social media results against the deduplicated committer results. That should make any spamming of the social media branch fairly apparent.
