Update: SDA got results. “This survey is currently closed. Please contact the author of this survey for further assistance.”
From the comments;
Your attempt at sabotaging this survey are ironic. But I not even sure if you understand the meaning of the word.
To prove there is no hate crime you had to a) sabotage a survey that was asking the question b) then gloat on here and falsely praise your work as noble and noteworthy.
Pathetic.
Delete my post, and prove my point.
Dont delete it? Good let everyone read how ridiculous your attempts are.
Heh – “All your burka are belong to us.”
(Original post continues below)
Ladies and gentlemen, don your nijabs…
Sample Questions:
I trust you can take it from here.
Job done. We’re so BAD! ~:D
I have followed your command. However I very interested in their definition of ‘hate speech’ – I think it might be just a little too liberal. But then I’m an old hatemonger (me and Mark could be twins!)
Where’s the “my husband beats the crap outta me and the Koran sez that’s okey-dokey” question?
Wow.That was fun.Is it a hate crime against Muslims to shoot them because they are blowing people up???
I bet that if you sent your son off to school dressed in a kilt it would attract the same attention from the same people that do or say something to people that wear burkas. Nothing to do with racism.
The English don’t send their kids off to school dressed as Morris Dancers. The Greeks don’t wander around town dressed in their traditional garb. It would be sure to attract attention. Mostly negative.
I’m left wondering what is it about London, Ontario that makes it the moonbat capital of Canada?
Something in the water?
Done. I only felt a little guilty. 😉
If somebody hits me with a carpet beater, since someone (ET) keeps arguing that a carpet should not necessarily be considered a religious statement, is it then a hate crime?
I think this survey exposed me to hatred, contempt and ridicule. Where can I file a complaint?
Done.
The only hate crime I continue to see is the one against Canadians letting these terrorists into my country.
If any student had written up such a survey in one of my classes – they’d fail.
First – it’s a university survey, and they can’t spell (prejudiceD is the verb, not prejudice) and their grammar is atrocious.
Second – their terms are ambiguous and thus empirically useless. What do ‘discrimination’ and ‘hate’ and ‘insult’ actually mean? How does one scientifically ensure that these meanings are common to the sample population who are answering?
Third – how does the respondent know whether the subjective feeling that you were insulted was due to your ‘being Muslim’ or was due to your ‘behaving stupidly’?
Fourth – the survey is scientifically invalid because the ‘researchers’ didn’t control their sample population. That is, anyone can answer that survey and LIE, LIE, LIE. [As did I when I answered it.]
Kate – please keep this survey in a file so that when the obvious ‘proof of religious discrimination’ is released by that ‘research’ team, it can be shown that their data source is garbage.
This survey is no different than a poll worded so as to elicite a certain response. The survey assumes that there is hate and discrimination so the questions are all geared to receive certain answers. There is no room for a response that says there is no hate or discrimination.
Its kind of like “Did you try to tamper with your photo ID?” Answer “No” Describe how you went about altering your photo ID.
Official petition to Scrap S.13.
http://www.righttospeak.ca/
Everyone, sign it.
Agreed …why do we let these people into our country ? i don’t get it is it becasue we are that desprate to fill our ding population ? like what is it ? and if i am right then why aren’t we looking for smart hard working people ? most people from africa ..not all but most ..same with the middle east ..have no work ethic ..simply becasue it is like plus forty all day long ..it is there culture to not work hard through the day ..just like lions they rest in the afternoons and during thwe hottest point’s of the day …so why don’t we bring in some otherp eople from other places ..but then agaion the aussies work pretty hard ..and the italians work pretty hard ….and the …ohh never mind !!
Paul in calgary.
“…that you were insulted was due to your ‘being Muslim’ or was due to your ‘behaving stupidly’?”
ET don’t you know it’s a hate crime to imply Muslims can behave stupidly?
“5. Hate speech is when someone says something mean or hurtful that insults another person’s identity.”
Oh dear.
It’s been a long time since I’ve seen such a poorly designed research questionnaire, but it sure does confirm the notion that hurt feelings = a crime.
I’m left wondering what is it about London, Ontario that makes it the moonbat capital of Canada?
Something in the water?
Posted by: ChrisinMB at April 19, 2010 11:12 AM
—
UWO and the rich kids from UCC et al that go there….
“5. Hate speech is when someone says something mean or hurtful that insults another person’s identity.”
============================
Even their definition is wrong. That should read: “5. Hate speech is when someone with white skin says something mean or hurtful that insults another person’s identity.”
What a rot of a survey.
And fun to take, thanks!
Back in the day, London ON was used as a marketing test center, for just about everything, by many companies – now that was a long time ago, so may not apply today.
London’s also a big student town – this has all the appearance of such, if pressed I’d say high school survey.
Why don’t they just ask outright: Don’t you find most Canadians ‘make you feel bad’ every day?
Didn’t take long to shut it down… 🙂
This survey is nothing more than another attempt to vilify white, Christian Canadians for being a bit weirded-out by enslaved women walking around their city wearing black body bags.
I wouldn’t talk to anyone whose face I couldn’t see. This is an open and (more or less) free country. We don’t hide faces in public here except for armed robbers.
Done.
UWO.
Also mentioned in the Sidewinder Report.
The only plus to UWO is the cheerleaders are hawwwwwwwt.
It’s been a long time since I’ve seen such a poorly designed research questionnaire, but it sure does confirm the notion that hurt feelings = a crime.
Convincing people they are a victim is the primary reason. It is shocking to watch how easily people are manipulated. I remember being in a training session and the facilitator listed all the names that are no longer acceptable when talking to women – girls being the big no-no, ladies the runner-up. There was no discussion about context or intent. So soon after we had a lot of confused and angry old-timers ticked off about getting grief over something innocent like “Let’s go for coffee, ladies” and women unnecessarily sensitive about PC word choices. On the plus side, it increased the consultants chances of being called back for team-building and conflict resolution seminars.
London, Ontario used to be a railway hub. Thomas
Edison worked there, as a telegraphist. However,
times change. “What is it about London, Ontario that makes it the moonbat capital of Canada?” is
the question. UWO and Fanshawe College is the answer.
Re the wearing of ethnic costume: in Holland, 35 years ago,
in the smaller towns, it was reasonably common to see women in ethnic costumes, going to work and at work.
Probably no longer (either Dutch working or wearing ethnic costumes).
12:20 p.m.: “This survey is currently closed. Please contact the author of this survey for further assistance.”
Point taken, Louise. 🙂
ET makes a point that the survey could have been worded/prepared better. Nevertheless, it gives one an inkling of another’s true feelings.
I wonder what these women forced to wear these awful coverings must feel when everyone stops and stares at them.
Your attempt at sabotaging this survey are ironic. But I not even sure if you understand the meaning of the word.
To prove there is no hate crime you had to a) sabotage a survey that was asking the question b) then gloat on here and falsely praise your work as noble and noteworthy.
Pathetic.
Delete my post, and prove my point.
Dont delete it? Good let everyone read how ridiculous your attempts are.
The definition of ‘hate speech’ provided is so ubiquitous that it could include most innocent comment into ‘racism’.
If this is the mind set of the anti-freedom left (and I’m convinced it is) then this frenzy to eliminate racism where there is none is a matter of misanthropic pantophobia. Which reaffirms an observation of mine that the anti-free speech activist left is essentially a clique of morbidly neurotic socially maladjusted misanthropes.
Kate is correct in assuming these leftist memes are driven by mentally ill people.
Surprised Canadian:
Would you be still be surprised to learn that online surveys are not a particularily scientific (or useful) way to obtain data about a non-online topic?
Your attempt at sabotaging this survey are ironic.
All your burka are belong to us.
I’ve worked for many years in the survey industry while I was attending school.
The sponsor of every survey our company was asked to perform always had a pre-determined conclusion. The only reason the survey was commissioned wasd to provide some “evidence”. We had a team of statisticians that would work with the client to design the survey and use a whole host of tricks to ensure the desired response is obtained.
surprised canadian – your post betrays an astonshing lack of logic.
First, you are assuming that your survey was a valid and reliable examination of ‘hate crime’. But it wasn’t. It was an atrocious unscientific and biased mess. As I said, in any of my methods classes, it would be a total failure…and I’m not even referring to the spelling and grammatical errors.
The questions were simplistic, open-ended and vague. They did not go deeper into the situation beyond a superficial query.
Your definitions were all empty and ambiguous. For example, your definitions of ‘hate’ were invalid; after all, ‘doing something mean or insulting’ someone is not a crime. Kindly look up the legal definition of ‘hate crime’ (section 318-9 of the criminal code).
Furthermore these terms are so ambiguous as to be meaningless. What does ‘doing something mean’ actually mean? Same with ‘insult’. These are subjective terms and your survey hasn’t explored what the respondent, IF they answered ‘yes’, means by such a response. You ought to have asked, not what the respondent thought was an ‘insulting’ or ‘hateful’ act, but you ought to have provided various instances of behavioural interaction and asked IF they had experienced these and IF they considered them acceptable or unacceptable.
Then, you ought to have asked for positive experiences. And you ought to have used a broad range of respondents, both Muslim and non-Muslim, with the same questions – and ensured that these questions were not specific to ‘being Muslim’..but might be due to other contextual issues.
It was an unscientific survey, and as a university researcher, you ought to know this. You ought to have run it by an expert in survey construction and the formation of questions. If you say you did – then, whew – what kind of teachers do you have?
“a) sabotage a survey that was asking the question.”
Soooo. By not answering a survey the way you want us to is sabotage? If you don’t like the answers it might be better if you didn’t ask the questions.
I don’t think anybody other than you thinks they are being noble.
“Your attempt at sabotaging this survey are ironic. But I not even sure if you understand the meaning of the word.”
You am Right, we am not sure U am understand meaning of words – ‘specially racism.
Like I said ; a clique of morbidly neurotic socially maladjusted misanthropes
Add marginally literate to that.
*how dare you give the incorrect responses to our survey.
ect…
Boo Hoo, I did not get a chance to vote.
Thank you for proving the point that hate crime does exist. I can see this scheme backfiring– contributing to the research, rather than damaging it.
To the comment of the professor. Why not help these students do it right sir. Your comment degrading their attempt at research barely serves as a mask for your ‘hate’. Let me further define that term for you. According to Merriam-Webster, “Hate: intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury (did they injure you in some way sir? IS that why you are so ‘angry’ and ‘afraid’ that you must participate in this blog bomb?) or perhaps b: extreme dislike or antipathy (why do you dislike them, did they do something to you directly Dr.?).
So you participated in degrading this survey with your academic discourse, but the real deal is that you can’t step up and really say your feeling on this matter. Dancing around the issue as you do.
I bet you all did not know that your attempt to skew the results actually cemented them.
It might be worth while doing some research of your own, that might go beyond your misconceptions that were obviously developed in social circles that were not inclusive of Muslim’s.
Also, what the heck is the deal with mistreatment as a result of ‘behaving stupidly’. Do you mind defining the empirically usefulness of that? Or somehow quantifying what constitutes ‘stupid behavior’?
Anyway, get a life people. And professor, go help a student do better research than what you see. Perhaps rather than fail them, show them the way to succeed.
Surprised —
I am surprised at your surprise that people here are against your surprisingly ignorant definition of hate speech.
I believe this survey was conducted as a result of recent alleged “hate crimes” perpetrated on certain “designated groups” in London.
A few months ago two homos were accosted by a white guy and he called them “faggots”.One of them was hospitalized not because he was assaulted, but because he suffered an anxiety attack as a result of the hateful words.
This past week two lesbos were walking down the street and a carload of yahoos screamed “crack snackers” at them.
No physical contact, no encouragement to others to do them harm, nothing except words.
Don’t know where the Muslim thing comes from.
ChrisinMB @11:12 AM- “Something in the water?”
That ‘something in the water’ would be the bodies of the four Muslim women found drowned near Kingston in the Rideau Canal. You know “that honour killing.”
Huh.
I just got back from the dentist. There was a screaming baby there, too.
Alan:
Thank you for proving the point that hate crime does exist
Too funny. Alan thinks we’re conducting a hate crime. Funny how the original Taylor decision for what a “hate crime” is has been expanded to include “not following Alan’s rules”.
BTW Alan, learn some grammar and spelling. Before you learn about hate crimes, try learning the 3 Rs first: reading, (w)riting and (a)rithmetic.
Alan – How can our comments on this blog ‘prove that hate crime’ exists’? Again, please read Section 318-9 of the Criminal Code for the legal definition.
You aren’t seriously suggesting that criticism of your grossly unscientific survey is a hate crime, are you?
You wrote: “Let me further define that term for you. According to Merriam-Webster, “Hate: intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury”
You CANNOT ask this question in a survey! Why not? Because these terms, every single one of them, are ambiguous! You have to ask, not about what the respondent feels for that is entirely subjective, but about the actions that occurred, and then YOU must come to the analysis that such an action was motivated by anger against the individual’s religion/colour/ethnicity, etc.
Your survey didn’t do this.
You wrote:” (did they injure you in some way sir? IS that why you are so ‘angry’ and ‘afraid’ that you must participate in this blog bomb?)”.
Now, you have to provide EVIDENCE that my criticism of your survey is unjustified ..you have to show how your questions are indeed well-written and will actually produce valid and reliable results. Can you do this? No.
Equally, if you want to set up an IF-THEN empirical framework – that I criticize your survey, not because its is badly written, but because I HAVE problems..you have to provide evidence for this. Can you?
You write: “or perhaps b: extreme dislike or antipathy (why do you dislike them, did they do something to you directly Dr.?). ”
Again, your IF-THEN hypothesis is speculative and a red herring. You fail to support your questionnaire against the criticisms that it is poorly written, with ambiguous terms, and superficial…and with an uncontrolled sample population.
So, those are my ‘feelings’ on this matter. I’ve spoken them. You refuse to acknowledge that there is anything seriously wrong with your survey methodology. That’s ignorant and arrogant on your part.
Now, the next step is to show how our CRITICISMS of your badly designed questionnaire are proof that there are ‘hate crimes against Muslims in London, Ontario’. That’s quite a connection!
How does criticizing a terrible survey show that my circles are ‘not inclusive of Muslims’? Again, try to explain the connection!
My question to you about exploring whether the so-called ‘mistreatment’ against someone is due to their religion/ethnicity..or is due to some other reason, such as ‘stupid behaviour’..is that you are making a FALSE ASSUMPTION.
Your false assumption is that IF someone is mistreated (and that’s a subjective experience and not necessarily valid)..THEN, this is due to their religion/ethnicity. Prove it. You didn’t ask any questions that could empirically prove this. Asking someone if they thought they were mistreated is invalid, scientifically, and asking them if they thought this mistreatment was due to their religion/ethnicity, is even more invalid.
How do you know that this wasn’t due to the respondent’s own ‘stupid behaviour’? So, you have to explore the ACTION of the respondent. Did they try to rush by the bus driver without paying? Did they not have the exact fare? What was the context? Your survey totally relied on personal and subjective opinions. Useless as empirical data.
Oh, and sometimes, failing a badly designed survey is what is needed. You see, in my classes, everyone had the opportunity to submit their draft surveys – and these were gone over carefully to point out problem areas. If they either didn’t submit or didn’t change the bad surveys – then, a failure is deserved. Do you seriously think that your survey would give you scientifically valid results just because you want it to do so?
Do you know what you’ve shown by your response? That you are unwilling to learn; that you reject science and empirical data; that you are trapped in a pre-determined perspective and are uninterested in examining and analyzing the real world. You are determined to ‘prove’ that ‘hate crime’ exists in London..and to heck with the scientific method, data, facts, validity, reliability. You prefer the unscientific tactic.
ET:
You explain the many ways the survey is not scientific. Obviously. And agreed.
But in doing so, you apparently presume that a scientific survey was the intent, but that it was seriously flawed. If you think this is the case, you’re naive; if you know this was not the intent, your lesson is wasted.
I see a parallel here vis-a-vis your IP-AP conflict arguments: the apparent presumption that the Arabs are actually seeking the kind of solution — an excellent one, to be sure — you are proposing.
They’re NOT.
I recently encountered an excellent argument by Murray Rothbard contra the usually brilliant von Mises, who very often argues that if the political leadership could just understand that the economic policies they are proposing would not yield the outcomes they are actually seeking, greater prosperity would ensue.
Rotbbard argues — correctly I’m sure — that Mises is making a presumption that the leaders are actually seeking outcomes that are to the betterment of the populace.
They’re NOT.
It might be worth while doing some research of your own, that might go beyond your misconceptions that were obviously developed in social circles that were not inclusive of Muslim’s.
I think most Canadians have learned to be extremely tolerant in their social circles. Maybe the combination of honor killings, terrorist activities and the constant insinuation that we are racists if we question multiculturalism and the victim industry have created the “misconceptions”.
ET I think you wrongly assumed this survey was part of a “scientific” curriculum. I’m guessing it’s part of a liberal arts program were feeling rule.
Essentially the point of this research was to better understand something you all feel like you have the right to silence. Hope you feel better. Hope you sleep better.
You people are a collection of breathing hate crimes. All you can really do is speak amongst your echo chamber of hate.
When was the last time anyone heard of a Muslim woman bombing anything? Why is a Muslim so bad? What do you really know? Nothing more than FOX has told you. You are bad. You have committed a hate crime towards Muslim women by not allowing them to have a legitimate voice. All of you contributing to this negation should feel guilty.
However, what is more problematic is your effort to skew our results. Fact: prior to your hack, there was 100% evidence of hate crimes in London. Every one of your entries is clearly noticeable because of its blatant contrast to the previous data. Plus your blog blew your cover as well. Now all of you have contributed to this research in ways you probably did not intend.
That’s right, you helped us out! HAHA!!
So thanks for helping and showing us all your hate. Your comments in the survey = hate. Your blog entries all will be documented by the Canadian government and put to academic press as supporting evidence of the original hypothesis.
Nice try but not very well thought out.
Good luck wasting the rest of your lives living in you secure bubble of distance and hate. Perhaps if you considered asking a Muslim for your self about their lifestyles and you misconceptions you might learn more than talking shit amongst your insulated group of haters. Ever think of that? Ever think of asking the people you “other” why they do the things you think they do? Or are you too afraid they will bomb you?
Again thanks again for adding a new dynamic to our research and good luck with not understanding the world in the future. I’m sure you will all get really far with that.
R