| I wish they would have collected more demographic information. It would help both to determine how representative the survey was of the greater OCaml community, and also to ascertain the diversity of the community itself. Being rather niche, there is certainly going to be underrepresentation of certain groups. It would be helpful to be able to compare the results to similar data covering the demographics of other language communities like Haskell and Rust, and the wider software/tech field. I also feel like the distribution methods and sample size of the survey likely skewed the results significantly. The survey window was relatively short and the choice to distribute the survey through discuss.ocaml.org and some mailing lists definitely missed a lot of other segments of the community. I find it funny that one of the questions asks where people interact with the community, and a large number of respondents answered discuss.ocaml.org. Well of course they do! That was one of the few noted places the survey was advertised! In the end I agree with one of their conclusions: > It would be ideal to delegate the formatting of the survey and the summarization of results to professionals. But I would add that ‘distribution and administration’ to that list . |