Preface: I think the statement of misuse potential is an insult to the people involved.
However, we have easy and simple precedent about the response rate comparing the mailing list vs direct. Specifically, with the survey that went rogue in the summer of 2018, the response rates were dramatically higher when they emailed directly. They went rogue because they didn't receive statistically relevant responses using the lists. However, they then created their list by scraping public sources of Apache org addresses and I cut the speaker from our event where they were to present the results. That survey was about work experience so I won't posit on the response rates for this survey. I would say we would want to collect a statistically viable sample and comparable or in excess of 2016. Regards, KAM On Fri, Nov 22, 2019, 03:55 Justin Mclean <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > > People filter those more often. > > I’m not sure how other people use filters but I tend to use them for a) > emails that I want to pay more attention and respond right away and b) > emails that I’ll look at at a later time. I filter emails sent to my > apache.org address but don’t filter those sent to committers@. > > I think that sending emails directly to apache addresses will result in > less responses (based on my experience) and given previous history of how > external people have used lists of address I’m concerned the list will be > misused. > > Perhaps the better question to ask is what is the response rate we expect > or hope for? What rate is needed for the results to be statistically > significant? We could for instance start with a) and if we don’t get the > repose rate we need switch to b), > > I am also happy to go along with what the wider PMC think on how we should > approached this. > > Thanks, > Justin > >
