Compiling this data was not as hard as I expected, let’s go through the data and the shiny graphs!
Age of Beeple
Most are above 24! Seems we got an older average age compared to a lot of social media. It would be interesting to see how many came here with experiences from independent forums before Reddit.
Where Beeple reside
This one’s a big graph. Though we can notice most people are from the US. Would be nice to see more countries represented though a big part of it likely has to do with language. (You will need to open the big graph in another tab, it’s too big to show properly.)
Gender identity of Beeple
So, as expected, mostly men. However, less than expected which is nice to see. There should be outreach to at least equalize this.
Sexual orientation of Beeple
This is kinda surprising. It seems we managed to get a lot more LGBTQ+ people than expected considering most of you all come from Reddit - so this is nice to see. This is most likely because of our focus on a safe space.
Whiteness of Beeple
As expected, mostly white which is unfortunate. I think there’s outreach to be done in that regard as well.
Neurodivergence of Beeple
We seem to have a really surprising amount of neurodivergent people! Definitely nice to see.
Beeple with disabilities
I… have no idea how to interpret this data so I’ll just say, shiny graph.
Beeple’s awareness of the Fediverse
Most knew about the fediverse but still a good 20% had not heard about it so glad to see you all managed to find your way here!
How Beeple have been dealing with Beehaw
It seems most people feel relatively confident in their ability to use Beehaw and most people seem to enjoy it. That makes me really happy to see. Feels rewarding, feels good.
Conclusion
I wanna thank everyone for the feedback about the survey and its questions - we’ll do better next time! I’m glad we did this survey because it shows the areas to work on in terms of outreach! Thank you all for your participation!
Because people bring their personal experiences, histories, and identities to every discussion. Having a folks with a range of different experiences and identities contributing, imo, greatly benefits discussions; I want to hear multiple perspectives on an issue (within reason of course - I’m not interested in engaging with racists, transphobes, fascists, etc., for obvious reasons). If a community is very one-sided (ex. Mostly white folks, mostly men, and so on) how can I curate a well-balanced perspective on a given topic? I only know what I know, and if everybody around me is coming from a similar background and we’re all saying the same shit - what kind of discussion is that?
Good point, but then you are generalizing about ‘white’ men like they are all the same and they all have the same point of view.
And by saying that it’s unfortunate that the majority of users are ‘white’ it looks as if they wished these users weren’t here.
I’m a cis white man and I felt no offence when reading that. I also embrace diversity and I’m curious why you don’t?
We could build a community of men, each having a unique points of view, but none of them would be a woman’s.
Well said! Hope you don’t mind if I steal this for future use, I think it illustrates the point very well. Could be useful in some real-life interactions, I’m thinking.
Go ahead :)
The interesting thing about words is that we made them all up. Different people feel very differently about certain words in certain contexts. Slang and vernacular are perfect examples of this - we learn how people are using existing words in new ways all the time, and we adjust appropriately. What people don’t always recognize, however, is that words fall in and out of fashion constantly and how they are applied are also cultural artifacts. Prolific artists, famous movies, and important political figures all shape the way we interpret specific words - the cultural zeitgeist controls more than we are often aware.
Rather than assuming that unfortunate means it must be negative, because that’s the experience you’ve had when that word was used around you, I’d suggest asking questions and assuming good faith. You could ask what do you mean, when you use the word unfortunate before jumping to conclusions. Perhaps English isn’t the posters first language, or perhaps English in the country they are from use the word unfortunate in a very different way. Questions and good faith, rather than assumptions and escalation can quickly solve any questions you have and everyone leaves happy.
I think this is also a perfect example of why diversity is so amazing to be around and experience because you get exposed to so many more ways to utilize language, so many different backgrounds, and so many diverse points of view 😄
That’s true. I don’t think all white folks, or men, or any other category of people is a monolith - but just that hearing, for example, a woman’s POV - especially a Black woman’s POV, or a trans woman’s POV - on gender disparity in sports is a voice I really want to hear in that discussion, since those folks might have a very specific take on the topic. Even if everyone else in the discussion is a man - and I assume they WILL be men from a wide range of cultures, language communities, sexual orientations, etc. - still, none of them can bring the particular nuance that (in this example) a woman can.
I could get a lot more political on this, but I think that’s really the heart of the issue. I believe admins are saying “we have a majority group here in these ways, and while that’s not unexpected, it’s unfortunate that we’re pretty one-sided in those categories of folks right now - so we want to try and change that.”
However, I want to acknowledge that the tendency to single out white people and men, in particular, is kind of a thing right now, which - speaking from my lived experience as a white person - can feel real bad in the immediate moment. Nobody wants to feel unwelcome or like their existence is problematic. Unfortunately, the world is set up in ways where certain groups of folks (usually white, usually men) are repeatedly asked their opinion on things, or given the power to make decisions over the lives of people from completely different backgrounds. Assuming everybody is engaging in good faith, it’s more about making sure everybody has a seat at the table and less about “your very existence is problematic and you should be shunned.” Yes, some people mean that when they say it, but again, that does fuck all to foster a healthy discussion space (again, within reason here - fuck fascists and so on). How tf is a woman (for example), regardless of the diversity of her lived experiences, ever going to be able to speak to men’s mental issues and the crisis of care going on there? Like, a thousand women, all of them from widely different cultures and backgrounds, could never bring the personal nuance necessary to truly discuss that important issue.
Do marginalized people sometimes vent by making sweeping generalizations? Sure. Does that promote open and healthy discussion? No. But not every space is a discussion space, and I try to stay open-minded when I’m met with that energy. People are hurting; sometimes they talk shit. And this goes both ways - folks can end up defensive after hearing people talk shit constantly. That’s completely natural, but I truly don’t think that’s the case here. And Beehaw is young - there’s still lot of growing to do. That this survey was even launched makes me feel like Beehaw’s future is pretty bright.
Exactly this. I think it’s great to bring a range of social values from different cultures to a discussion. I think that a wider range of values helps make for fairer outcomes.