Compiling this data was not as hard as I expected, let’s go through the data and the shiny graphs!
Age of Beeple
Most are above 24! Seems we got an older average age compared to a lot of social media. It would be interesting to see how many came here with experiences from independent forums before Reddit.
Where Beeple reside
This one’s a big graph. Though we can notice most people are from the US. Would be nice to see more countries represented though a big part of it likely has to do with language. (You will need to open the big graph in another tab, it’s too big to show properly.)
Gender identity of Beeple
So, as expected, mostly men. However, less than expected which is nice to see. There should be outreach to at least equalize this.
Sexual orientation of Beeple
This is kinda surprising. It seems we managed to get a lot more LGBTQ+ people than expected considering most of you all come from Reddit - so this is nice to see. This is most likely because of our focus on a safe space.
Whiteness of Beeple
As expected, mostly white which is unfortunate. I think there’s outreach to be done in that regard as well.
Neurodivergence of Beeple
We seem to have a really surprising amount of neurodivergent people! Definitely nice to see.
Beeple with disabilities
I… have no idea how to interpret this data so I’ll just say, shiny graph.
Beeple’s awareness of the Fediverse
Most knew about the fediverse but still a good 20% had not heard about it so glad to see you all managed to find your way here!
How Beeple have been dealing with Beehaw
It seems most people feel relatively confident in their ability to use Beehaw and most people seem to enjoy it. That makes me really happy to see. Feels rewarding, feels good.
Conclusion
I wanna thank everyone for the feedback about the survey and its questions - we’ll do better next time! I’m glad we did this survey because it shows the areas to work on in terms of outreach! Thank you all for your participation!
it’s a good indicator we are going to continue to ask that question on the survey forever, for what that’s worth. very clearly a “the beatings will continue until morale improves” question because oh god, some of the responses here
I’m so glad that the mods aren’t getting steamrolled into submission. I was having a bad mental health day today and some of these comments really bothered me. Immediately my reddit-trained mind was like, oh, you dumbass snowflake. Touch grass.
But then I was like, fuck, the whole reason I’m on Beehaw is because it’s supposed to be different here. Thanks for continuously affirming my belief in it 👍
To be clear, we’re also aware that repeatedly being exposed to this kind of conversation can be demoralizing as well. I watched this happen on another website where the just asking questions crew would show up in every goddamn thread about every identity that wasn’t ciswhitemale. I remember a specific thread asking for women to talk about what’s hard for them, which was both dominated by male voices before any women showed up and then when women actually talked about the problems they experienced (and deeply couched their language, I might add), they were met with an endless line of men insisting “that’s not me”.
So to be absolutely clear, we value your voice and we don’t want to lose the community we’ve built here either. If this is ever frustrating to see, please vent about it. I can’t promise I’ll be perfect, but I’m trying my best to avoid tone policing (I’ve already screwed this up a few times, and I apologize deeply to anyone I scared away), especially on issues which directly effect or marginalize your experience. I think it helps a lot to have such a diverse set of responses, because often people are unaware how deeply frustrating and exhausting fragility and managing other’s emotional state can be, especially when you are on the receiving end of marginalization.
The most refreshing thing here has been to be able to respond and be backed up in my response.
Personally the most demoralizing thing about having the conversation taken over is often not being able to respond/take it back. At first I was afraid to say that this is just one more example of white people main character syndrome, because I was like, ugh, I’m going to get a bunch of comments of how I’m the actual racist one for generalizing all white people.
The justaskingquestions crowd makes me feel crazy for getting upset, and then villanizes me for being the upset one. But obviously I’d get more upset than them, they’re the ones erasing me.
So normally I just slink away from these places, whether it’s online, or my (supportive) boyfriend’s shitty white family, or my uni alum groups, or my workplace. And that’s the most demoralizing part, that they can say whatever they want and I have no recourse other than to leave.
So it means a lot to me that I don’t have to leave here. That I can say my piece and have it backed up by the mods, not bullied & downvoted into submission.
I genuinely support people asking in good faith. Some white people just don’t understand and they want to. But by the 2nd or 3rd response it’s very clear which are in good faith and which are simply camouflaging their intolerance. So thank you for shutting the latter down.
I’d like to respectfully ask that you don’t hide behind the excuse of people acting in bad faith. I think that section, as written, is actually difficult to interpret in good faith. The charitable interpretation of it is that we need to be intentionally welcome and aware of POC in the community, but that is just factually not what that sentence says. It just says that it’s unfortunate most of the people here are white. It just seems like an intentionally inflammatory way of phrasing the meaning.
This has been addressed ad nauseum in this post.
Words are entirely made up. You are bringing social connotations to the definition of the word unfortunate. The person who used the word clarified how it was meant to be used. Your ‘charitable interpretation’ has been both definitively proven already. We’ve asked for people to treat each other with good faith in this space and have requested that you ask questions rather than assume bad faith unless it’s unequivocally clear they are spreading hate speech. This is outlined in our philosophy docs and is generally nice behavior.
I understand that you are upset, but I’d ask of you and anyone else reading this to stop creating the same conversation again in another place on this post.
[edit: on re-reading, the sentence that followed it that said “I think there’s outreach to be done” is clear, even if I think the words could have been ordered better for flow.]
Yeah, I think as written it implies too much to be interpreted unambiguously. I agree, the charitable interpretation is “we need to do more” but that’s an inference that is drawn from my pre-existing understanding of beehaw’s management and vision, and maybe a sprinkling of trust in their intentions.Without explicitly stating “unfortunately we failed to reach minority communities,” my feeling is that it leaves a lot of room for accusation of other parties for the “unfortunateness” of the situation or misreading of future intent, and personally I think that just leads to unclear communication.