Research Methodology (RE: Real World Scalability and Ruby -

Ruby
1

Actually Joseph used one of the soundest research methods I know of. He
published an obviously flawed “Strawman”, didn’t pretend it was anything
it
wasn’t, and the wisdom of the group began fixing errors and filling in
blanks. So, just like “Nail Soup”, a basic seed is evolving into a
matrix
that has more information than any single one of us could contribute.

Thanks for taking the initiative,

Peter.

2

On 9/10/06, Peter B. [email protected] wrote:

Actually Joseph used one of the soundest research methods I know of. He
published an obviously flawed “Strawman”, didn’t pretend it was anything it
wasn’t, and the wisdom of the group began fixing errors and filling in
blanks. So, just like “Nail Soup”, a basic seed is evolving into a matrix
that has more information than any single one of us could contribute.

Except that he drew conclusions from complete guesses, which were
obviously slanted in particular directions. For all the guesses, it
would have been just as safe to guess “Java” or “J2EE” or even “Ruby”
but there wasn’t a single such guess. That shows the research was
being conducted to prove a point…not very scientific.

Perhaps it can proceed from here as you described, but it starts off
on a bad foot to make random guesses that lean toward a particular
theory.

3

Quite a few of the guesses can be refined using LinkedIn (search for
engineers working at the company; see what skills they list; make
obvious deductions).

Bill

4

Peter B. wrote:

Actually Joseph used one of the soundest research methods I know of. He
published an obviously flawed “Strawman”, didn’t pretend it was anything it
wasn’t, and the wisdom of the group began fixing errors and filling in
blanks. So, just like “Nail Soup”, a basic seed is evolving into a matrix
that has more information than any single one of us could contribute.

there’s the Sitepoint survey:

http://www.rubyinside.com/sitepoint-reports-531-of-web-developers-using-ruby-225.html