announcements self-promotion

The Man Boobz Survey is up! Go take it! [UPDATE: Survey closes Thursday at 8 PM, EST]

Survey says: Actually, none of these are options on the Man Boobz survey
Survey says: Actually, none of these are options on the Man Boobz survey

Thanks to the hard work of Argenti Aertheri and the suggestions of various other Boobzers, the Man Boobz survey is now up and ready to be taken. It will give me — and all of you — a better picture of just what sort of people read Man Boobz on a regular basis. It’s completely anonymous. Go take it! It will only take a few minutes.

I will probably leave it up for a couple of days, and will report the results here as soon as the numbers are crunched.

I think pretty much any other question you might have about it will probably be answered on the survey itself, so hop to it!

Thanks Argenti!

632 replies on “The Man Boobz Survey is up! Go take it! [UPDATE: Survey closes Thursday at 8 PM, EST]”

RE: Argenti

Seduction sure isn’t his thing

Why would you put that into my head, Argenti? Why would you force me to even THINK such a thing?

Hrrrm. I have some ideas. But it’s eat time, and I don’t want to eat, so am just kind of stupid and hungry instead.

RE: Argenti

Back, with food in front of me.

1) he’d react…badly

Very, very badly. I mean, that is probably the biggest trigger he has, and he has a LOT.

And I’ve decided what I’m going to do. *smile* You’re not going to like it, though.

Ok, ip first, idk what possessed the survey software, but it’s 1,645 not 1,650. Second, so far maybe 10 trolls? Which is astonishingly few. But they’re really out there — every ethnicity checked, 58 religions, all employment options (yeah ok, you’re an unemployed employed activity military stay at home disabled parent and student, pull the other one)

Third, whoever got the honor of survey #1 is David with SCENTED FUCKING CANDLES. I’m wondering if this one actually is David, since he’d have had the easiest time getting the #1 slot (besides me, but mine is like 1,200+ because I started crunching data before taking it >.< )

Four, I'm going to get an Infinity Smashed break! *jumps up and down*

Five, TALACARIS!! The smart ass data is here —

I can make it editable if you need me to, but if those numbers get borked I can't fix it, that's the only ID I've got.

First off, he can’t break it, if he flakes completely we’ll still have the raw counts. Second, it’s a chance to be funny in a way we approve of — which is why I’m trusting him with it.

Talacaris — at some point tonight I’ll have the list of surveys to toss. I’m finishing up the very last few surveys and then calculating outliers, I’ll post the survey numbers here when I finish.

Make that at some point tomorrow (Friday) as I’ve just spent two hours fighting with excel over stupid fucking apparently doesn’t like pasting hundreds of rows by hundreds of columns.

Well, it looks like 100 people other than David think they’re him. Or a horribly large proportion of survey-takers are coincidentally named, David.

Looks like I claimed row 490 😉

Data downloaded … and now to try to make sense of it.. Argenti, do mean that there are more responses to be included?

Talacaris — no, I mean a handful of those are getting dropped once I do the outlier math and figure out who was obviously trolling.

Which I’ll be doing very shortly. Sorry, I overslept big time.

LBT: you were right.. I’m sorry everyone. I thought i remembered practical statistics, and spreadsheets, but apparently I do not,it just becomes confusing. Thanks for the trust anyway, Argenti, even if it was misplaced.And the word to try not to troll still stands.

No problem talacaris, it’s a shit ton of data and this is not the sort of misplaced trust I was worried about — just refrain from trolling and we’re good 🙂

If any one remembers how to do binary correlations, the link’s up there, have at it if you want!

This may already have been answered, but was there a separate question for people who have changed denominations/sects/synods within their original religion/religion of birth? I am afraid I borked the boxes with multiple Judaisms.

Eurosabra — yeah, it was at the top of the religion page. And checking multiple is fine, I’m working on figuring out who checked so many that they had to have been full of it (e.g. nobody follows 57 belief systems)

Fuck you excel, fuck you M$, and especially fuck you for making office for mac a watered down version of office!!


In related news, this hissy fit brought to you by Argenti attempting to remove the 5 surveys that have been mathematically determined trolls (my mathematical method shall be included in the final report, right now it’s too mathy to make sense, or maybe I just need sleep)


And the word to try not to troll still stands.

Been seeing that. Can’t speak for everybody, but I really appreciate it.

I appreciate it too. it still seems kinda surreal, though.

Does this make sense?

First, I calculated the average and standard deviation, and labelled anything more than two standard deviations from the mean to be an outlier. As the data is highly skewed, I then calculated the skew (using excel’s skew function, because I’m lazy like that) and multiplied it by 150%; except in the case of ethnicity, where I used 75% as the skew was 20~ and there were 27 options. Anything outside that range I highlighted as “an interesting outlier”. The reason for this difference being that the data was so skewed that in many cases there were mathematical outliers that where clearly honest answers — e.g. disabled (in)employed students — I’m looking for trolls, not interesting people 🙂

That done, I figured out how many boxes one would have to check to have checked more than 75% of the options, and labelled those as possible trolls.

So at this point we have three lists — mathematic outliers, interesting outliers, and possible trolls. I assigned a number of 1-3 to each option and figured out how many times each survey was an outlier (of any sort). Note that I did this for all the “check any” questions — all the religion ones, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, relationship status, employment, both disability questions and politics.

I then went ahead and assigned every survey that was any sort of outlier an “outlier score” by multiplying the number of outliers on the survey by the number assigned above. Those scores ranged from 1 (lots of ones) to 119. Then I determined which of the “outlier scores” were outliers using the average and standard deviation method, but excluding the 119 as it was more than twice the second highest “outlier score” and made only those two into true outliers (which excluded the person who checked literally every ethnicity category and every gender option). Having excluding that obvious outlier, and calculated the average and standard deviation on the rest of the “outlier scores”, we ended up with five surveys that where outliers among outliers — I excluded them from the results as they appear to be trolls.

While finding outliers in each set of data and then determining which surveys had enough outliers to be outliers is a bit weird, it seemed far better than guessing, or excluding everyone that was a mathematical outlier on any section — that would’ve meant dropping every disabled (un) employed student! So in the end, it looks like we had five trolls, which really isn’t surprising considering the number we have around here regularly; in fact, I was expecting more than that!

And the word to try not to troll still stands.

Been seeing that. Can’t speak for everybody, but I really appreciate it.

Same here, I appreciate it too.

Talacaris — perhaps needless to say it, but me too. If I didn’t think you capable of it, I wouldn’t have asked you to do the smart ass section (and it’s totally fine that you can’t do it, no worries)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.