Small World

I do not wish to be involved....period

I don't either but it appears that the OP took my jest seriously.

I happen to use SNA in my work. Interestingly (and disturbing) it is used to represent many things from influence from a marketing perspective to how contagious diseases spread.

I'd really like to understand how this data was even available for analysis as it either represents PMs sent or reviews done (reviews would be less concerning, especially if you have so little life that you compiled this manually...if you are that big a geek I will hire you today).

If from PMs, this is highly concerning to me and likely to result in my account being shut faster than a cat running through a dog kennel. Originally Posted by Flyboy182

Ummm, I believe those comments were made in jest. But flyboy raises a question not in jest. Was this generated using reviews or something else? Originally Posted by watchoutthegameisrigged

Would be interesting to know where the info came from, or if there was any info. Graph could have come from anywhere. Even if it was real, what would it prove that isn't already obvious to everyone? Originally Posted by tuckahoe

I'd also like to know where the same poster got the data for his word cloud over in the fuck you you're fired thread. I know enough about how those are generated to start thinking that someone with a pretty high degree of technical sophistication has access to all the data on this board. Don't think it doesn't happen. It is routine and common to build social networks based upon cell phone billing data.

Might be my last post here. Au revoir. Originally Posted by Flyboy182

I would also like to know how your getting your info? You done dodge four bullets

GD... I think you the dot under me... wait now on top of me.. wait now beside me.... fuck I love that graph!! Originally Posted by mrwishful

mrw,

As always there are advantages and disadvantages for this sort of data.

I happen to use SNA in my work. Interestingly (and disturbing) it is used to represent many things from influence from a marketing perspective to how contagious diseases spread.

I'd really like to understand how this data was even available for analysis as it either represents PMs sent or reviews done (reviews would be less concerning, especially if you have so little life that you compiled this manually...if you are that big a geek I will hire you today).

If from PMs, this is highly concerning to me and likely to result in my account being shut faster than a cat running through a dog kennel. Originally Posted by Flyboy182

What are your concerns?

This data could also be used to build a stronger more comprehensive eccie community.

Would be interesting to know where the info came from, or if there was any info. Graph could have come from anywhere. Even if it was real, what would it prove that isn't already obvious to everyone? Originally Posted by tuckahoe

All this graph reveals is what is already known.

I do not wish to be involved....period Originally Posted by TX Guy

It is done.

I would also like to know how your getting your info? You done dodge four bullets Originally Posted by Worldtravler

I am not sure if I should respond to comments such as these. SNA is a way to build a stronger network. There are many advantages to having a stronger network.

Everyone has the same information and everyone knows whats going on. If everyone has some encouragements for good outcomes, then maybe they will be sensitive to the fact that their outcomes is conditional on how others conduct themselves.

Networks facilitate a flow of information.

Networks can improve communication and collaboration.

It is to your advantage to have a strong network with redundancy. What form that takes is up to you.

Networks are built upon relationships. With relationship everyone has access to important information and new ideas.

GD... I think you the dot under me... wait now on top of me.. wait now beside me.... fuck I love that graph!! Originally Posted by mrwishful

I think you should come put your dot on me Monday or Tuesday. I'm just sayin'.

I am not sure if I should respond to comments such as these. SNA is a way to build a stronger network. There are many advantages to having a stronger network.

Everyone has the same information and everyone knows whats going on. If everyone has some encouragements for good outcomes, then maybe they will be sensitive to the fact that their outcomes is conditional on how others conduct themselves.

Networks facilitate a flow of information.

Networks can improve communication and collaboration.

It is to your advantage to have a strong network with redundancy. What form that takes is up to you.

Networks are built upon relationships. With relationship everyone has access to important information and new ideas. Originally Posted by camel66!Aden

Adios

This is not a typical network. Discretion and restricting the flow of information are very important aspects of this site. Facilitating the flow of too much information is a bad thing. Helping some folks connect the dots is a very bad thing. Please restrict your SNA analyses to other networks where the free flow of information is a more welcome thing.

This is not a typical network. Discretion and restricting the flow of information are very important aspects of this site. Facilitating the flow of too much information is a bad thing. Helping some folks connect the dots is a very bad thing. Please restrict your SNA analyses to other networks where the free flow of information is a more welcome thing. Originally Posted by TestSpin

It really comes down to where you sit.

I am not sure what you exactly mean by "Helping some folks connect the dots is a very bad thing."

Everyone is welcomed to PM me if you want to voice your concerns by other means.

The reason people are concerned is probably because you did not define the term "interaction". What parms constitute an interaction? A review? commenting on a thread started by a user? Or a PM to a hobbyist/provider? Two of those criteria are acceptable (from my limited understanding of this community) one is not.

It would not take any type of special access to correlate the data in the first two scenarios (I could probably script something to do it in about an hour).

I note that you mention "volunteers". Now (once again I am only speaking with a basic knowledge of policy) these people could share their info with you,but I cannot imagine a scenario where it would be acceptable to share any PMs that involved or were originated by people outside your project (which if there is provider involvement would be uh...everyone else).

Interesting thread everyone...

Or we could just be being toyed with for someone's entertainment.

Or we could just be being toyed with for someone's entertainment. Originally Posted by watchoutthegameisrigged

That's the most logical explanation that I can gather