This message appeared on the contesting.com reflector from Mark Wilson of the
ARRL.
FYI, My message back to him then his message.
73
Chuck K3FT
--------------
Mark,
Thanks for the info.
I must offer a small rebuttal to your statement that "..you only hear from
those people who happened to be visiting that area of the Web site while the
poll is active and care enough (one way or the other) about the topic to
take the time to answer. ..."
I offer this. IF you publicize IN QST and via W1AW bulletins as well the ARRL
letter
that in 30 days (say you published it in December 2001 QST) starting on 01
January 2001
the ARRL would be taking a survey on the removal of contesting and section
information
from QST. The poll wil run 15 days or 30 days (or a reasonable number of days
to allow
the word to get out)
I would bet a years pay.. seriously.. that you would find more responses than
just 'from
those people who happened to be visiting that area of the web site while the
pollis
active...' voting in the survey. I would expect that you'd hear from a LOT of
the
members since you adequately publicized that the poll was going to be taken and
what the
poll dealt with. Since it's the members only site, you have automatic control
that only
ARRL members can vote.
It would be MOST interesting to see how those results stack up against the
professional
service using the statistically valid sampling techniques. Plus publishing it
in QST,
putting it in the ARRL letter, and putting out W1AW bulletins plus a few EMAILS
costs
ARRL. ZIP.. NADA.. ZERO since those methods of distribution are going out
anyway.
As an aside..
You used the Web site for your 'What would you do with the Novice Bands?'
survey. Plus
it was in QST. So, what's the difference?
All the economic reasons are good and they are valuable if all you care about
is the
bottom line. However, the ARRL is supposed to be of, by, and for, the Radio
Amateur wich
means that it MUST consider MORE than just the bottom line and the dollar value
of
something.
BTW..what is the sample size that YOUR polling company uses and how do they
ensure the
'randomness' of the sample chosen since the universe is ARRL members only?
Just one member's thoughts.
73
Chuck K3FT
----------------
Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] ARRL contest coverage
From: "Wilson, Mark K1RO" <mwilson@arrl.org>
To: "'Jpdalt@aol.com'" <Jpdalt@aol.com>
CC: cq-contest@contesting.com, yccc@yccc.org
Jim wrote..
How about posting a QST survey on the ARRL web site? If you want only
responses from members, put it in the Members Only section.
Jim, KZ1M.
Mark responded..
Jim, the problem with a poll on the Web site is that you only hear from
those people who happened to be visiting that area of the Web site while the
poll is active and care enough (one way or the other) about the topic to
take the time to answer. Answers from that select group do not truly
represent the opinions of a cross-section of the membership and cannot be
relied upon for decision-making.
The QST surveys are sent to a random sample of ARRL members. The samples are
chosen under the guidance of an independent research firm, using
industry-standard techniques, to ensure that we reach a representative
cross-section of the entire ARRL membership. Followup efforts are made until
the response rate is high enough to ensure that the results are accurate.
A number of companies that specialize in survey research publish information
about sample size and accuracy on their Web sites. You can find a lot of
information on survey research on the Web. A good place to start is
www.google.com ; search for
survey sample size
and that will lead you to a number of good resources.
73, Mark K1RO
-----------------------
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|