Preliminary Results of The 2007 Demographics Survey

Dudes,

How do we get more chicks? (Besides changing the color scheme to pink and gossiping about, "Like, Oh my gawd! Michael is totally dating susan now!")

I echo the thoughts of :

Spiderj:

Nicely done...I'm a sucker for snazzy pie charts and bar graphs.

Very attractive 3D, shaded pastels, matte finish...

Majic:

Indeed, it's remarkable how very little of what politicians routinely tell us even makes sense when analyzed logically.

Which is why I tend to direct less energy toward politics.
(I'd elaborate, but don't want to highjack the thread.)

sardion2000:

...surprised by the relative popularity of Space and Science topics

- nice to see so many fellow Space and Science fans.

As to 9/11,

seagull:

...it all seems to be regurgitation of previously released information or disinformation depending upon your point of view on the topic.

I've seen the vids, read the threads, books and articles.
Short of some Earth-shaking proof, to me, it's just too depressing, to endlessly contemplate,
that the group (or sub-group) in charge of our Country could sink to such depths.
I tend to use ATS as a way to relax, recharge, and rearm , rather than as another heavy chain to reality.

dAlen-

Totally missed this survey...what is the link to the actual survey?

My survey appeared as a pop up, if that helps.

Will there be an update, with more data, if and when it comes in, or is this a closed poll?

SO-

While the non-members certainly influence the "less than 30 days" category, 46% of respondents reporting visiting ATS for more than a year.

( wouldn't that be 40.6% ?)

A bit of surprise is the popularity of the podcasting, with over 30% of respondents picking that as their favorite ATS feature.

Speaking of...Any update on the ATS 2 out of 3 Amigos podcast Review?

Thanks SO, and ATS respondents., always interesting to see who we are.

[edit on 4-3-2007 by Jbird]

[edit on 4-3-2007 by Jbird]

[edit on 4-3-2007 by Jbird]

Originally posted by JbirddAlen-

Totally missed this survey...what is the link to the actual survey?

My survey appeared as a pop up, if that helps.

Will there be an update, with more data, if and when it comes in, or is this a closed poll?

thanks...
- i have pop ups blocked in Safari (mac), suppose that may be why I didnt see it.

Peace

dAlen

Yes-we do need more females. Although I have to agree, no changing the colors to anything pastel

How can Hillary Clinton or any other female be president in the year 2008/2009 if females do not probe for the truth like males (84.4% to 15.6%)? Females need to do more groundwork if they wish to succeed in the Presidency.

By the way, with the male-dominated war thing in history (war kills everybody psychologically), I would not mind seeing a female as president. And I am male.

Could a link please be provided to do the survey? I can't access popups. Also, I think participation in this survey should be encouraged a bit more. 2000 odd participants is miniscule considering the scale of this site.

I also feel that User Location should be added as a question.

Its a pity about the male-female ratio... 9:1 Although I think this should be contrasted to the male-female ratio of Internet users globally.

www.clickz.com...

There is a cool chart towards the bottom of that page, according to which, the percentage of males and females on the net is fairly even, with a slight tilt towards male. So... we are dispraportionate even for the net...

Originally posted by The_Modulus
Could a link please be provided to do the survey?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

We're at over 18,000 total responses, and none of the percentages in the answers have changed by more than .5%.

Solid data, for sure, based on your results.

Two things I wonder however: 1. How many people took the survey more than once? I have had it pop up on me at least half a dozen times. Some surveys use I.P. addresses to help prevent more than one vote and to define location. (I know, that has flaws too)

2. I see many on the membership list have not been active here for years, That inflates the true volume of members. Shouldn't there be a purge of inactive members every couple of years?

Just a doddering and eccentric old man's thoughts.

[edit on 6-3-2007 by TheAvenger]

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
I continue to be surprised about the decline in interest in 9/11 conspiracies. This is the third survey we've presented to members that asks such a question, and the decline has been happening for more than two years.

If anything, it shows the overwhelming failure of the so-called "Truth Movement"... and perhaps even shows how their tactics and version of "truth" hurt overall interest in 9/11 conspiracies.

I think this is the result of time.

Yep, time, not because people lost interest, but because people have had time to study both sides and have concluded that yes, there was a conspiracy and there is no way to know the truth BUT that most of the new information is old news.

Also, I firmly believe the Liberal left leaning sites have polluted the truth movement so much by partisan politics "neocons" and how conservatives want to institute a police state and on and on, just turns some people off. Turned me off. I have accepted there was a conspiracy, but the theories nowadays are so full of BS theres no point in reading anything any more.

So I agree, the truth movement needs to change tactics and see the alienate some people.

Thanks for the link SO. I still feel that location would be a very interesting statistic to have... pretty please?

I am not surprised by the male to female demographic as such but I am surprised at the attitude it has raised. 'How do we get more chicks?"...has anyone explained to this member that ATS is not a pick-up joint - or may be I'm missing the point.

I realise that there is a certain play on stereotypes but really - can we grow up a little and not go pidgeon-holing everyone. Women are not Bratz dolls. Pastels, gossip and fashion do not frame our lives and our thoughts.

Of course if that wasn't bad enough - we get the ATS official line and I quote verbatim;

'No surprise here, the vast majority of visitors are men, which is typical of our topics.'

I am sorry WHAT? Do women not trouble their pretty little heads about such things?

You are not going to get more women on ATS with that dismissive attitude. Women are very active in world politics, the US is not the benchmark or the be-all and end-all. The US is quite backward in its regard of women and boy does it ever show here on ATS.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout

I realise that there is a certain play on stereotypes but really - can we grow up a little and not go pidgeon-holing everyone. Women are not Bratz dolls. Pastels, gossip and fashion do not frame our lives and our thoughts.

Of course if that wasn't bad enough - we get the ATS official line and I quote verbatim;

'No surprise here, the vast majority of visitors are men, which is typical of our topics.'

I am sorry WHAT? Do women not trouble their pretty little heads about such things?

Amen, and Amen!! Pastel Pepto-Pink will drive me away even quicker than the macho dismissive attitude that I get from some of the guys here!! ( And I totally LOVE the political conspiracies...so there!)

Thank you Frayed1 - I too love the political conspiracies and I have found that I am invariable referred to as 'he' when posting comments. I don't mind it, I find it quite amusing, but I did worry for a time that I would be dismissed if some members realised I was female - then I figured sod it, it says far more about them than me.

All the best

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout

'No surprise here, the vast majority of visitors are men, which is typical of our topics.'

I am sorry WHAT? Do women not trouble their pretty little heads about such things?

You are not going to get more women on ATS with that dismissive attitude. Women are very active in world politics, the US is not the benchmark or the be-all and end-all. The US is quite backward in its regard of women and boy does it ever show here on ATS.

The 'official line' was not a stab at marginalising the intellectual prowess of the female species, it is simply a known fact to most members that there are more males on the site than females. The statistics in this regard were simply not that surprising. I do not think that what SO meant was that women are just interested in hair and make-up, therefore it is not surprising to not find them here. It is just an observation

Also, we are just having a bit of fun here. The site, yes, is about conspiracy discussion, but we do enjoy a bit of commedic banter between the members, and a bit of silliness here and there.

Location stats? Does no one else feel location stats could be interesting?

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
Of course if that wasn't bad enough - we get the ATS official line and I quote verbatim;
'No surprise here, the vast majority of visitors are men, which is typical of our topics.'

I am sorry WHAT? >snip<

You are not going to get more women on ATS with that dismissive attitude. Women are very active in world politics, >snip<

World politics is a very, very, very small slice of the entire topical universe that makes up ATS. Most of the more popular core topics have typically been over-populated with males for several decades. All you need to do is gaze about at any UFO conference and you'll see roughly the same ratio as represented in our survey.

It's not "dismissive" if it's an accurate analysis of the history of these topics and the typical demographic involvement.

Thanks for taking the time to respond to my comments

Modulus and SkepticOverlord I think you may have misunderstood me.

Firstly, I was responding to spoon1 with regard to the use of 'chicks' etc.

It may have been humour or banter or whatever but does that mean I have to just take it. Can't I point out that it's a bit puerile? Isn't it only fair that I get to take the mick back, isn't that what banter is? If it's all one sided , then no it isn't.

Similarly, the phrase '...which is typical of our topics here..' may sound like no big deal to you, and I respect that women are the minority here, but that phrase says something else to me and however unintended that fact remains. I wasn't insulted I was simply pointing out my amused indignity and the fact that some women might be put off. It is a fair point I think, just because ATS is 'historically' male dominated does that mean women should be put off from getting involved. Do you or do you not want more 'chicks'?

Lastly, I was keen to point out to Great Tech that although the US had not had a female leader, that many other countries had, my own included. He didn't seem to realise it and I thought it was worth mentioning. Hence the reference to world politics, it was not meant to impy it was anything more than a '...very, very, very small slice..' of ATS

I hope that I have clarified the matter and that we can at least agree to disagree.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout

Similarly, the phrase '...which is typical of our topics here..' may sound like no big deal to you, and I respect that women are the minority here, but that phrase says something else to me and however unintended that fact remains. I wasn't insulted I was simply pointing out my amused indignity and the fact that some women might be put off. It is a fair point I think, just because ATS is 'historically' male dominated does that mean women should be put off from getting involved. Do you or do you not want more 'chicks'?

Hear, hear. I do agree with you. I think so much of the discourse of this age is laced with subtle refferences to our patriarchal society. As males it is often difficult to see how such a small, seemingly insignificant statement can be offensive to a female. I see now that it is, and I think here on ATS we should be more aware of these nuances in our speech, as we are typing, and should review our posts before clicking 'Post Reply'. Not only on ATS, but I hope these things become knead out of society completely.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout

I hope that I have clarified the matter and that we can at least agree to disagree.

Crystal.

I'm more concerned with accuracy. It's accurate to indicate that males are more attracted to the majority of topics on ATS than females as a result of historical experience. (15+ years experience with various communities covering these topics)

When reporting on the results of a survey, and an analysis of the results, accuracy is more important than consideration of phraseology that might (might) hurt someone sensibilities.

It's fine to discuss the implications afterward, speculate on the meaning, and consider the implications, causes, and potential solutions.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

It's fine to discuss the implications afterward, speculate on the meaning, and consider the implications, causes, and potential solutions.

This was all I was doing, I was not questioning the accuracy of the data or your experience of the topics, I was simply indicating that you could have been a bit more encouraging.

Accuracy aside you have got to see what I mean about the phrasing - come on just think about it? From a female perspective it is a tad patronising.

I consider everyone on ATS, regardless of gender, colour, creed or persuasion my equal. We all have something to offer; new knowledge, a different perspective, a lifetime of experience, whatever.

I don't know, but I would assume you would like more people to join ATS, and I am sure that you agree that women are as likely to have interesting opinions as men. Just because historically more men have been involved that doesn't mean that things can't change does it?

There could be any number of reasons why women are not more prevalent in the conspiracy/UFO etc circuits and on ATS in particular, but there are definately some women here, so some women at least are interested. And I'm sure there are many more out there who would be and will be.

It's not up to me to tell you your job, nor do I want to. First impressions count that's all. I personally find that kind of unconscious patronage quite disarming and funny, other might not, that's all.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
I was simply indicating that you could have been a bit more encouraging.

I don't think you're getting my meaning here... the data is being expressed with impartiality. Any "encouragement" is unwarranted in a report on data.

From a female perspective it is a tad patronising.

I'm sorry you feel that way. Perhaps you'd like to shatter any perceived "stereotypes" by authoring some phenomenal contributions to traditionally male-dominated conspiracy/UFO topics?

I consider everyone on ATS, regardless of gender, colour, creed or persuasion my equal.

And unless we express our gender, outside of surveys like this, no one really knows who is who... the field is level.

women are as likely to have interesting opinions as men.

Often more likely.

Just because historically more men have been involved that doesn't mean that things can't change does it?

Certainly not, and no one ever indicated otherwise. In fact, we all about change here.

There could be any number of reasons why women are not more prevalent in the conspiracy/UFO etc circuits and on ATS in particular,

In my experience, there are slightly more women involved in these topics on ATS than other venues... primarily because of our adult decorum. Additionally, online communities, have traditionally been mostly male as well... double whammy.

If there is any board, on any topic, that hold promise for the most diverse membership, it's ATS.