[Baypiggies] Geographical location [was: Next demo night]

[Stephen McInerney]

>From: Dennis Reinhardt <DennisR at dair.com>
>At 02:34 PM 7/21/2006, Alex Martelli wrote:
>
> >Personally, I remember the survey results as indicating a plurality
> >preferring the Google location, but far from unanimously; in
> >consequence,
>
>The poll never came out and asked about Google/IronPort.  It defined the
>South/North Bay separation as the Palo Alto/Mountain view border.  Maybe
>the poll has some abstract value but requires layering on assumptions to
>understand its relevance to our present locations.

I will revise and post the survey by 7/31. (Apologies about the extreme
delay due to several circumstances outside my control.)
The video would have been available immediately, noone told me I was not 
going to be videoed.

I specifically withheld releasing it because of this question: I need to 
show the results
to iluminate rather than divide this ongoing discussion about location.
Such that we might reach agreement.

>Further, the poll votes exceed the total of those actually attending either
>site combined.  I conclude some of those voting would not show up at either
>location.  Posting of video on a regular basis broadens our reach.

I will include several analyses, one weighted by number of meetings that 
people attend.
The case can be made that that the weighted one is undemocratic since it 
will skew towards South Bay and Peninsula members, simply because that is 
where meetings are held.
But I will put the data up and we can discuss what works best.
Some people can never attend for legitimate reasons e.g. they live in 
Richmond/Berkeley and only take public transport. Whether their preferences 
should be taken with equal weight is a major source of disagreement.
With benefit of hindsight I might have divided up categories between people 
who live locally but have no interest in attending, and people who cannot 
attend but really want to.

So, results by 7/31.

Regards,
Stephen