Reader Survey

Metroblogging would like to know a little more about you, our devoted readership, so help us out and fill out our quick survey. We promise it won’t hurt. Not even a little.

5 Comments so far

  1. Joanna (unregistered) on November 10th, 2005 @ 12:29 am

    I tried to fill out the survey but did not like the options for question #7. And, it would not let me proceed without selecting an answer on that question. So, add an option along the lines of “the same” and I’ll try again.

  2. F.E. (unregistered) on November 10th, 2005 @ 2:26 am

    “15. Do you consider metblogs to be more valuable sources of information that other media since there are no content filters?”
    It has the potential, but postings are too infrequent, and often times either lack content or the content is fucking whiney and reader-irrelevant (e.g.: “Who knew a car wash would turn out so eventful”, “Stray Dog: 1 Animal Control: 0”).

    “16. If given the option to see all of the Metblogs with no advertising for a monthly subscription fee, would you be interested?”
    No way, for the reasons listed above. Also note Austinist doesn’t charge — and they scooped the La Zona Rosa Chappelle Show tickets — that alone would have been worth a monthly fee.

  3. ttrentham (unregistered) on November 10th, 2005 @ 9:24 am

    Joanna, I can’t change the survey. I agree with you though. I would’ve preferred a third option on question 7 as well (and that it not have a typo in it). With most surveys, there’s a question or two that may not have the answer you’re looking for. Any chance you can just pick the least offensive option and complete it anyway?

    F.E., it’s all personal preference. I find the writing as a collective we on the -ist sites annoying. I don’t want to get into a comparison between the two sites, but I’ll say that we’re different enough that there’s room for both. The writing and audience on Austinist is decidedly younger than ours. I completely agree with you on the frequency of posting problem here. I’m working on that.

    Honestly, I agree with you on 16 as well. I certainly wouldn’t pay for either site, but ads don’t bother me anyway because I run Firefox with AdBlock.

  4. omit (unregistered) on November 10th, 2005 @ 1:28 pm

    F.E.: Man, for somebody who doesn’t like whining, you sure can be whiny. But thanks for sharing.

    Here’s my beliefs about this site:

    1) It’s not about events and cool things to do, although it doesn’t shy away from that. Whether Dave Chappelle is playing next week or not, we have some important issues in this city being decided by people who really don’t care what the populace thinks and are in positions to profit from our ignorance.

    We have a police force consuming our budget that is unaccountable to public concerns. We have a metropolitan transportation authority that shows little return for the amount of money they receive and refuse to pay their employees a fair wage. We have a state transportation department that wants to toll our most used existing freeways. We have out-of-state real estate carpet baggers looking to turn a quick buck here with no concern about Austin other than the checks they’ll receive from us. A daily newspaper that sometimes acts like a chamber of commerce booster rather than a critical media component. The Chronicle covers a lot of these issues, but there’s a lot that’s going on.

    2) I don’t believe in a monthly fee, and it sounds like a ridiculous question.

    3) I didn’t conceive the survey. Austinist is owned by an NYC company, and Metroblogging is owned by one from LA.

    4) There are at least 2-3 posts a day. And most of us have day jobs. But there’s always room for improvement. So thanks for the input.

  5. sean bonner (unregistered) on November 10th, 2005 @ 7:16 pm

    Just so it’s clear, we have no intention of charging for metblogs. Ever. The question was asking if you had the option (that’s means optional) of seeing the sites ad-free for a monthly fee would you be interested, we’re only asking because some people have come to us asking for that and we were wondering how many people actually wanted something like that. Turns out not many, which is what we assumed.

Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.