AO3 News

Post Header

The Organization for Transformative Works' April membership drive is over and we are delighted to say that we exceeded our fundraising target of US$40,000, with a final total of US$275,724.51 donated by 7,528 people in 84 countries. We are particularly pleased that 5,810 donors chose to renew or begin OTW membership.

Thank you so much to everybody in our global community who shared, posted about, or donated during the drive. Your support underpins our ongoing mission: to serve the interests of fans by providing access to and preserving the history of fanworks and fan culture, in all its myriad forms. We’re glad that this is as important to you as it is to us.

And if you're just now hearing about the drive - don't worry! The OTW accepts donations all year round, and all of our membership perks and thank-you gifts are available whenever you donate.


Post Header

The Organization for Transformative Works was conceived, designed, and built by fans. We are supported by the volunteer labor of the fans who staff us and we are also supported by the financial generosity of our members. This April, as we launch our biannual membership drive, we want to explain some of the benefits of OTW membership, which is available to those making donations of US$10 or above; and also describe some of the other ways in which we share our appreciation with our donors.

We understand that for many of our visitors, it won't be possible to donate to the OTW during this drive; and we want to stress that every member of our community is valued, whether your contribution is financial or whether it comes in the form of volunteer hours, creative work, wiki articles, kudos, or comments. You all make the OTW what it is and we are grateful for each and every one of you.

For those who are able to donate, the perks start at just US$10. Each one-time donation of US$10 or above entitles the donor to become a member of the OTW for the next calendar year. OTW members have the right to vote in annual elections for the OTW Board of Directors, the body which oversees the OTW's activity and strategic direction. The next elections will be held in August this year. You can find out more about the elections process here, at our elections website.

OTW members also receive an exclusive social media icon, which they can use across whichever sites they choose; and we are able to reward long-term donors with exclusive thank-you gifts marking three, five, and ten years of continuous membership. Check out the launch post to find out more about these exclusive premiums.

As always, we also have a variety of thank-you gifts available to those donating to the OTW in specific amounts. This drive, we're pleased to make two new gifts available: a new sticker set, which you can select with a donation of US$40 or above, and an exclusive playing-card pack. Each card depicts a fannish term of the kind you might see in AO3 tags. We hope that, as well as playing card games with them, you'll be able to use them to create on-the-spot creative challenges with friends or for yourself. We look forward to seeing what you come up with! The card pack is available to donors giving US$100 or above. More information about this and our other thank-you gifts are available at our donations page.

Illustrated playing cards, each representing a fannish concept: "Everybody Lives, Nobody Dies" is written on the branches of a tree, "Enemies to Lovers" is decorated with swords, the initials of "Work in Progress" are illuminated, and the last card, "Slow Burn", ends on a lit flame. A flipped-over card shows the back illustration, including the AO3 logo.

If that amount isn't feasible for you, don't worry. You can use smaller, recurring donations to meet the set amount. Visit our recurring donations page to set up a donation at whatever frequency and price point is doable for you. You'll receive instructions on how to register for the thank-you gift of your choice in your donation receipt. The gift will be set aside and, once your donations reach the designated level, will be sent out to you.

If you're in the US, where the OTW is a registered non-profit, you might be able to multiply your donation at no additional cost to yourself with an employer matching scheme! Speak to your HR department to find out whether this is something offered by your workplace.

You can find out more about how previous donations to the OTW have been spent by visiting our budget post. And once again, if you're able to give, please accept our thanks and click through here to visit our donations page.


Post Header

Membership Drive: Organization for Transformative Works: October 15-17, 2021

The Organization for Transformative Works’s October membership drive is over, and we’re delighted to say that we raised a total of US$195,009.65, far outstripping our goal of US$40,000. This was made possible by the generosity of 6700 donors from 77 countries worldwide, of whom 4786 chose to begin or renew OTW membership. We are so grateful, as always, for our global community. Thank you! Your support enables us to continue working in service of our mission: to further the interests of the fans we represent by providing access to and preserving the history of fanworks and fan culture in all its many forms.

We would also like to thank the volunteers whose service made this drive run so smoothly, and all of the users who posted, tweeted, and talked about the drive to their friends and acquaintances. Your help is invaluable in helping us to achieve our goals. We appreciate you all so much!

Finally, if you haven’t yet had time to make a contribution, don’t worry! We accept donations all year round. OTW membership, which is available to those making donations of US$10 and above, lasts for a full year from the date of the most recent US$10 donation; so anybody donating now will be eligible to vote in next year’s election for the OTW Board of Directors. The thank-you gifts we offer for donations of US$40 or above are also available on an ongoing basis. It’s always a good time to give!


Post Header

Membership Drive: Organization for Transformative Works, October 15 - 17, 2021

The Organization for Transformative Works is a labor of love. It was created by fans, for fans. We are a nonprofit organization, and we rely 100% on donations: the donation of time from our volunteers, and the donation of funds from the community we serve. Today marks the beginning of our biannual membership drive, when we ask that those of you who are able to do so consider making a financial contribution to support our work. You can read about how we spend your money in our budget.

Your donations to the OTW support our work across all our projects: from the Archive of Our Own to Fanlore; from our academic journal, Transformative Works and Cultures, to our fanworks rescue project Open Doors and our Legal committee’s advocacy for transformative works worldwide. Donors also benefit more directly. With any one-time donation of US$10 or more, you can choose to take up an annual membership of the OTW, giving you the right to vote for our Board of Directors in the election that we hold in August every year.

Members also receive a digital icon which can be used on your AO3 or on social media profiles; and those who have maintained OTW membership for three, five, or ten years are eligible for exclusive commemorative gifts. Find out more about membership and voting here.

Those making donations of US$40 or above are able to select from a number of thank-you gifts. New this year are an OTW tumbler in limited-edition white, and a brand-new sticker set. If you can’t afford to make a donation of this size, don’t worry: we’ve got you. You can opt to set up a recurring donation at a level that suits you and let our Development and Membership team know which premium you’d like to save up for. Once your donations hit the eligible level, they will dispatch your gift.

The Organization for Transformative Works is a registered non-profit in the US, and donors in this country may be able to take advantage of matched giving schemes from their employer. Please consider speaking to your workplace to find out whether this is a possibility for you!

If you aren’t able to make a donation this time, please consider sharing this post with others, and know that we appreciate your support however you are able to give it. Thank you for your money, your time, and your love. We wouldn’t be here without it!


Post Header

2012-07-29 10:46:50 UTC

A short update on Survey Sundays

We've been working on a rough schedule for our Survey Sunday reports to give the committees involved time to review their data and make sure we systematically cover all questions. Unfortunately, this means that we may not be able to answer your Survey Sunday inquiries in a timely fashion, as the related post might be scheduled for weeks or months off. We've done our best to push posts which people showed particular interest in to the top of the pile, but this hasn't always been possible. Although we warned about possible delays in our announcement post, we wanted to give you a specific heads up about this.

In short: we're still very happy to take questions, but we will integrate them into our regular releases, which might mean long delays. Thanks for your patience!

About the answers

Today we’ll be answering questions #84 to #88. These relate to the OTW website ( usage, design and content. We've prioritized preparing this data so that our webmasters can factor the results into their planned OTW website redesign. All questions presented in this post are complete and include final numbers, including the last three open (i.e., free-text response only) questions.

It’s important to note that everyone who replied to Question #84 saying that they hadn’t read the site before or that they didn't remember having done so would have skipped all the other site-related questions and automatically been redirected to the last question in the survey, #89, though this fact will also be mentioned when relevant in the corresponding sections.

Additional notes on Freeform Questions #86-#88

In these questions users were given a text box in which to enter their opinions. This type of question obviously requires more time and labor to answer than one with limited choices. This fact, along with the skipping logic, the fact that these questions were at the end of a long survey, and possibly a lack of awareness of the OTW website likely contributed to these questions having a small number of answers compared to the rest of the survey. (Only 4-5% of total survey respondents answered these questions.) Many categories thus represented the opinions of only a very small portion of the respondent pool, so we have chosen not to represent these results as percentages, preferring to focus on the actual counts.

We categorized the answers to these questions by assigning one or more categories to each (similar to tagging) rather than simply dividing responses into distinct bins. Some comments were quite lengthy and included several different ideas, suggestions, and concerns. For this reason, the number of answers in each category will often add up to a number greater than the total number of respondents who answered a question.

84. Have you read the OTW website ( before?

Answer Options Response count Response percentage
Yes 1,772 35.7%
I don't remember 1,145 23.1%
No 2,046 41.2%
Answered question 4,963
Skipped question 1,023

82.9% (4,963) of the people who took the survey answered this question. People who answered either "I don't remember" or "No" were immediately redirected to the last question in the survey (question #89), while people who skipped this question, or answered "Yes", were directed to the following questions related to the site.

Only 35.7% of the people who answered this question chose "Yes", indicating that they had read the OTW website. 41.2% said "No", and 23.1% said they didn't remember.

graph for question 84, description in the text above.

85. Based on your previous visits to the OTW website (, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

Answer Options Strongly agree Agree No particular opinion Disagree Strongly disagree Response Count
The OTW website made it easy to find the information I was looking for. 167 748 640 127 24 1,706
The OTW website is easy to navigate. 178 776 600 126 22 1,702
The OTW website met my expectations as a user. 185 766 648 79 18 1,696
Answered question 1,707
Skipped question 4,279

Only 28.5% (1,707) of survey respondents gave an opinion on at least one of the statements. Of the 4,279 people who skipped this question, 3,191 did so automatically by answering "No" or "I don't remember" to question #84. This means that 18.2% of the people who took the survey skipped this question purposefully. Taking into account that only 2,795 people would have seen this question (1,772 who answered "Yes" on question #84 and 1,023 who skipped question #84), about 38.9% of the people who saw this question skipped it.

In general, response count for each statement was nearly identical, and a high percentage of people skipped the question purposefully compared to other sections and questions. The percentage of people expressing a particular opinion on each statement had few variations. Given that the statements are related (particularly "easy to navigate" and "made it easy to find the information I was looking for" – the third option is more ambiguous), this is not overly surprising.

Below we'll analyse each statement separately.

The OTW website made it easy to find the information I was looking for.

Answer Options Response Count Response percentage
Strongly agree 167 9.8%
Agree 748 43.8%
No particular opinion 640 37.5%
Disagree 127 7.4%
Strongly disagree 24 1.4%
Answered question 1,706
Skipped question 4,280

28.5% (1,706) of people who took the survey gave an opinion about this statement. This is almost 100% of the people who answered question #85 in any form (1,707).

53.6% (915) agreed in some manner (whether strongly or not), 37.5% (640) expressed neutrality by choosing "no particular opinion", and 8.8% (151) disagreed in some manner (whether strongly or not).

graph for question 85 first answer, description in the text above.

The OTW website is easy to navigate.

Answer Options Response Count Response percentage
Strongly agree 178 10.5%
Agree 776 45.6%
No particular opinion 600 35.3%
Disagree 126 7.4%
Strongly disagree 22 1.3%
Answered question 1,702
Skipped question 4,284

28.5% (1,702) of people who took the Survey gave their opinion about this statement (about 99.7% of the people who answered this question in some manner).

53.1% (954) agreed in some manner (whether strongly or not), 35.3% (600) expressed neutrality by choosing the "no particular opinion" option, and 8.7% (148) disagreed in some manner (whether strongly or not).

graph for question 85 second answer, description in the text above.

The OTW website met my expectations as a user.

Answer Options Response Count Response percentage
Strongly agree 185 10.9%
Agree 766 45.2%
No particular opinion 648 38.2%
Disagree 79 4.7%
Strongly disagree 18 1.1%
Answered question 1696
Skipped question 4290

28.3% (1,696) of people who took the Survey gave their opinion about this statement; this is about 99.4% of the people who answered this question.

56.1% (951) agreed in some manner (whether strongly or not), 38.2% (648) expressed neutrality by choosing the "no particular opinion" option, and 5.8% (97) disagreed in some manner (whether strongly or not).

graph for question 85 third answer, description in the text above.

#86 - What should we improve about the website, in your opinion?

Answer Category Response count Response percentage
No Opinion 114 30.4%
Mistaken Site 14 3.7%
No Improvements Necessary 24 6.4%
Suggested Improvements/Stated Issues 223 59.5%
Answered question 375
Skipped question 5,611

Question #86 was first of the 3 free-form answer questions in the OTW website section, and used the same skipping logic as 85. Thus, only 2,795 people saw the question. Out of this number only 375 (13.42% of those who saw it) answered it in any form. (See the note at the beginning of this post for a description of how answers to this question were categorized.)

Out of 375 respondents, 114 answered to clarify that they had no opinion, 14 gave feedback for a different site (often AO3), 24 stated that no improvements were necessary and that the site was fine the way it was, and 223 pointed out issues with the site or offered suggestions to make it better.

graph for question 86, description in the text above.

Suggested Improvements

Answer Category Response count
Organization/Navigation 100
Searching and tagging improvements 40
Missing Content 33
Front page content and general page layout related issues 33
Visual concerns 29
Content Presentation 26
Other 15
Total Number of Responses with Suggested Improvements/Stated Issues 223

223 survey takers left comments suggesting site improvements or describing site issues.

The largest number of comments involved the overall organization and navigation of the site (100 answers) and the navigation/searchability of the blog (40 answers). Users expressed frustration with not being able to find the content they were looking for, even though that content is present on the site. Some users were only able to find the information after a Google search of the site, others said they reached it in ways they did not expect or that they wouldn't have found the content if they didn't know it was there in first place. There were several suggestions that information on volunteering should be made easier to access and find, and that the tagging of posts should be improved.

Another common theme was the organization of the front page and the general layout (33 answers). Here one of the biggest points was users not seeing the search box. Some users noted it was hard to find, others asked for a search box, having overlooked it. Other frequent topics included adding some static information in addition to the blog and making the path to access project links and information shorter.

A third common type of feedback was requests for improvements to visual aspects of the site (29 answers). These fell into two main themes. The most frequent request was a review of the color scheme of the site both for accessibility and aesthetic reasons. Others requested that the OTW website layout be more lively, with images.

A fourth common topic included missing content and content presentation. 33 comments involved content being missing or hard to find, including information about the OTW, its projects and committees, and its finances, as well as information about helping the Org by volunteering, joining, or donating. Note that some users identified multiple types of missing content, giving a total of 67 answers.

26 comments were related to content presentation. Within the content presentation feedback two frequent issues mentioned were language clarity on the textual content, and a request for more charts, videos, pictures and general visual cues to make the content more appealing and easier to read

The remaining 15 comments covered a variety of topics not mentioned above, such as improvements to the calendar feature, performance issues, search engine optimization and accessibility.

graph for question 86 suggested improvements breakdown, description in the text above.

Breakdown of missing/hard to find content mentioned

Answer Category Response count
Projects/committees 21
About the Org/about the site/financial information 19
Volunteering/membership/donation 16
Elections 11
Total Number of Responses with Suggested Improvements/Stated Issues 223

While the nature of missing content was the focus of question #87, several respondents specified types of content they had tried to access but could not find, had difficulty finding, or felt could be clarified further in answer to this question. The most commonly mentioned content was information on projects and committees (21 answers), information about the OTW as a whole, such as general structure and finances (19 answers), information on volunteering, donating and membership (16 answers) and elections (11 answers).

graph for question 86 missing/hard to find content breakdown, description in the text above.

87. What information would you expect to find on the OTW website that's not currently there?

Answer Category Response count Response percentage
N/A - No Opinion 98 38.7%
Mistaken Site 6 2.4%
Nothing particular/all set 43 17.0%
Suggested content/improvements to content 106 41.9%
Answered question 253
Skipped question 5,733

Question #87 used the same skipping logic as #85 and #86; thus, only 2,795 people saw the question. 253 (less than 10%) of them decided to answer it.

Of the 253, 98 of them answered to clarify they had no opinion on the topic, 6 mistakenly gave feedback on specific OTW projects (often AO3), and 43 answered that they didn't think anything in particular was missing. 106 answers contained suggestions to add new or improve existing content.

graph for question 87, description in the text above.

Nature of content improvements requested

Answer Category Response count
Has missing content/can use more information 87
There but hard to find 4
Can use more updates 21
Total number of answers with content suggestions 106

Although the question was specifically asking about missing content, the responses covered a variety of concerns. 87 answers mentioned missing content or asked for more detailed content. 4 answers asked for more frequent updates to particular content. 21 respondents stated that the information they were looking for was there but hard to find.

graph for question 87 nature of content improvements requested, description in the text above.

Breakdown by type of expected information not found

Answer Category Response count
Other topics 46
Legal 18
Volunteering/donating/membership 17
Finances 15
Project 13
About the Org/its structure 12
Committes/Board 11
Total number of answers with content suggestions 106

The topic with the greatest number of requests for more information was the legality of fandom and previous cases (18 answers). It is important to note that half of these (9 answers) were specifically requesting information on legal issues with an international scope. Second most frequent request on information was volunteering and donating. Users were looking for more information on volunteering and making donations (17 answers). Specific requests included more current and detailed information on what types of volunteers are needed, what new volunteers should expect, and what is the difference between becoming a member, volunteering, and donating.

Other common requests were more detailed information on OTW finances and how donations are put to use (15 answers), more detailed and up to date information on projects (13 answers), more information on how the OTW is structured, and information on committees and the Board (11 answers).

The remaining answers contained a variety of content requests such as more information on staffers and volunteers as people, FAQs, translations, resources for existing volunteers, or better access/merging of information originating from various OTW communications outlets.

graph for question 87 breakdown of information expected but not found on the OTW site, description in the text above.

88. Do you have any other feedback about the OTW website?

Answer Category Response count Response percentage
N/A - No opinion/no further comments 127 54.3%
Mistaken site/off topic 13 5.6%
Further suggestions/comments 94 40.2%
Answered question 234
Skipped question 5,752

Question #88 asked for additional comments on the OTW website on topics that weren't covered by the previous two questions. Since the question was under the same skipping logic as #85, #86 and #87, only 2,795 people saw it. Out of these, 234 (less than 10%) chose to answer this question.

Of these answers, more than half (127 answers) were to state that the respondent had no further comment or that they had no opinion. Answers that only referred to previous questions by number (e.g., "what I said in question 86") with no further comments were also categorized here.

13 of the comments were feedback on other OTW projects, general commentary on the OTW, or other off topic content such as frustration with the length of the survey (this was the question-before-last of 89 questions).

94 answers included further suggestions or general comments on the website.

graph for question 88, description in the text above.

Nature of feedback on the website

Answer Category Response count
Specific criticism or suggestions 53
No other issues/overall happy 30
Thank you and encouragement 14
General dissatisfaction 5
Positive comments on specific features or aspects 4
Total number of answers with further comment 94

The most common type of feedback given in response to this question was to suggest improvements to the site (53 answers). The most common topics mentioned for improvement were organization and issues about the look of the website.

30 users used this space to state that regardless of their previous suggestions or comments they were overall happy with the site. 14 users thanked the website team or sent them encouragements. 5 answers contained non-specific dissatisfaction with the site as a whole, and 4 answers included comments on particular aspects of the site that worked well for the respondent.

graph for question 88 breakdown by nature of feedback, description in the text above.


Post Header

2012-07-16 13:36:37 UTC

Or, um, Survey Monday? Sorry the crosspost is a little late, folks!

About the answers

This week on Survey Sunday, as requested, we're releasing the first batch of AO3 related questions. These were:

  • Question 15. How useful do you find the Archive's tagging system?
  • I'd be very interested in the results for Questions 19 to 21, concerning kudos and comments on the Archive.
  • I'm very interested in the answers to 32 and 33 specifically, and to a slightly lesser extent, all of the opinion-based questions about individual AO3 functions. (15, 16, 22, 23, 24, etc.)

Today we'll be answering questions #10 to #17. These relate generally to how many people use the Archive and how they do so. All questions presented in this post are complete and include final numbers. Future posts will shed light on the ease-of-use of the different Archive features and other general opinions about the Archive.

The question requested in particular is "Question 15. How useful do you find the Archive’s tagging system?" so we're showing its results in the context of its section.

It's important to note that everybody who replied in Question #10 that they hadn't used the Archive would have skipped all the other questions related to the Archive, though this fact will be mentioned when relevant in the corresponding sections.

#10 -- Have you ever used the Archive of Our Own (AO3)? (n = 5794)

Answer options Response count Response percentage
Yes 5564 96.0%
No 230 4.0%
Answered question (n) 5794
Skipped question 192

Question #10 asked whether the respondent had ever used the AO3. 3.2% percent of the people who took this survey skipped this question.

Of those who answered, 4% said they didn't use it and 96% said they did. As the question did not distinguish between frequent users and someone who had been to the Archive once or twice, further questions were designed to shed more light on users' activity.

One thing to note about this result is that, as AO3 users received emails informing them of the Survey, unlike users from other OTW projects, we were likely to get a very high "Yes" rate on this question.

graph for question 10, description in the text above.

#11 -- Do you have an account at the Archive of Our Own? (n = 5555)

Answer options Response count Response percentage
Yes 4.583 82.5%
No 792 14.3%
I'm waiting for an invite 180 3.2%
Answered question (n) 5555
Skipped question 431

Question #11 also testifies to the influence of AO3 users finding the Survey through direct contact. This question asked how many respondents already have an AO3 account. 201 people skipped this question on purpose, and 230 skipped it automatically by answering 'no' on question #10.

A clear majority of respondents were account holders -- 82.5%. Only 3.2% of those answering were waiting for an invitation. Back in April, during the survey period, the AO3 invite list was around 5000, roughly a sixth of the current waitlist. This is, however, still a small response from that group.

The number of accounts at that time was around 42,000, meaning that at least 10% of AO3 account holders answered the Survey, compared to around 3% of those on the invite list. This difference in response suggests that either account holders are more likely to be aware of OTW news and events, or, more probably, that the proportion of respondents in this category is substantially larger because they were emailed individually about the survey.

graph for question 11, description in the text above.

#12 -- How efficient do you find the Archive's invitation system (invite queue or sending invites)?

Answer options Response count Response percentage
Very efficient 1227 25.9%
Somewhat efficient 1180 24.9%
No particular opinion 2029 42.8%
Inefficient 254 5.4%
Very inefficient 46 1.0%
Answered question (n) 4736
Skipped question 1250

Question #12 showed a growing skip rate as well, with 1,250 people (21%) of the people who took the survey, not offering an opinion about AO3's invite system -- these people encompass those who answered 'no' to #10 (230), people who answered they didn't have an account and weren't waiting for one in #11 (792 -- who also automatically bypassed this question) and people who just decided not to answer (228).

The highest response was the neutral 'no particular opinion' (2,029 or 42.8% of the people who responded). However, the invite system was at the time relatively favourably regarded with a 25.9% considering it 'very efficient', and another 24.9% considering it "Somewhat efficient." Only 5.4% felt it was "Inefficient" and a mere 1% considered it "Very Inefficient".

This opinion might be considerably different if more than 180 people answering the survey were currently in the invite queue or if the survey were run today, when nearly 30,000 invite requests are outstanding.

It may also have been different if the answer scale's positive and negative sides had been written with the exact same vocabulary -- the fact that one could not answer 'somewhat inefficient' may have pushed people holding more moderately negative opinions towards neutrality (not wanting to answer 'inefficient' outright) while one could answer 'somewhat efficient', attenuating the possible positive responses and thus encouraging them. The influence of the phrasing, however, can't be measured, and this is only one interpretation of its possible effect.

graph for question 12, description in the text above.

#13 -- What are you using the Archive for?

Answer options Response count Response percentage
For subscribing to creators/works 2654 47.9%
For viewing fanworks (e.g. fanfiction, fanart, audiofic...) 5279 95.2%
For bookmarking fanworks 2887 52.1%
For posting fanworks 3199 57.7%
For running challenges 110 2.0%
For participating in challenges 1018 18.4%
Other 168 3.0%
Answered question (n) 5543
Skipped question 458

Question #13 looked at what people were doing at the AO3. The number of skips dropped back to 7.4% of all respondents, only 228 of whom skipped this question directly (the other 230 had automatically bypassed the whole section by answering 'no' to question #10). 92.6% (5,543) of the people who took this survey answered this question in some manner, either choosing one or more options, choosing one or more options and writing in clarifying notes about them or other choice(s), or just writing in other choice(s).

95.2% of the people who answered said they used the Archive to 'view fanworks' -- perhaps predictably, by far the most popular choice. Only 57.7% said they post fanworks. 52.1% said they use it to bookmark fanworks, and 47.9% that they use it to subscribe to creators or works. 18.4% said they use it to participate in challenges, while only 2.0% said they use it to run challenges (mods generally being fewer than participants, this is not a surprise).

graph for question 13, description in the text above.

'Other' answers add up to 169 (some respondents wrote in more than one, and each action or feature mentioned is counted separately, so these are actually from 166 people). Of these other answers, 35.3% were 'download fanworks', 21.0% 'leave feedback of some kind' (comments or kudos or both), 15.6% 'to find fanworks', and 7.8% 'to calculate stats', either personal or general for both academic and personal enjoyment reasons. Still 20.4% (34) of these answers are grouped in a general 'other' category -- none were common enough to generate significant patterns. Some of the options include using the Reading History or Mark to Read Later features, using Collections rather than Challenges, following feeds, participating in the community, and tag wrangling.

graph for breakdown of the 'other' option of question 13, description in the text above.

#14 -- Have you ever used the Archive's search function?

Answer options Response count Response percentage
Yes 5161 93.3%
No 368 6.7%
Answered question (n) 5529
Skipped question 457

In Question #14 457 people (7.6% of the people who took this survey) skipped answering whether they had used the search function at AO3, only about 227 of whom skipped this question inentionally rather than automatically by answering 'no' to question #10.

Of the 5,529 who did answer, 93.3% said they had used the Archive's search function and 6.7% said they hadn't. Those who had were asked the following 3 questions -- #15, #16 and #17 -- and those who hadn't were made to skip directly to the questions about leaving feedback on the Archive (those questions will be analysed in a following post).

graph for question 14, description in the text above.

#15 -- How useful do you find the Archive's tagging system?

Answer options Response count Response percentage
Very useful 2569 49.8%
Somewhat useful 2004 38.9%
No particular opinion 189 3.7%
Of limited use 318 6.2%
Not useful 77 1.5%
Answered question (n) 5157
Skipped question 829

Question #15 asked about tags. Almost double (839 or 14%) the number of respondents skipped this question as the last -- these people include the 230 avoiding the entire set of questions by answering 'no' to question #10, the 368 people who said they hadn't 'used the Archive's search function' in #14, and 231 who simply decided not to answer.

The majority of people who did answer this question, 2,569 (49.8%), found tags very useful, with another 2,004 (38.9%) respondents finding them somewhat useful. This indicates that there is an overall positive opinion of the tag system in place, since 87.7% of the respondents find the tag system useful or very useful.

A 3.7% felt neutrally about it, while 318 (6.2%) found them 'of limited use' and 77 (1.5%) found them 'not useful'. Negative opinions thus add up to a 7.7% of respondents.

graph for question 15, description in the text above.

#16 -- How efficient is it to search and find works on the Archive?

Answer options Response count Response percentage
Very efficient 1260 24.4%
Somewhat efficient 2678 51.9%
No particular opinion 284 5.5%
Inefficient 717 13.9%
Very inefficient 216 4.2%
Answered question (n) 5155
Skipped question 831

Question #16 asked about the efficiency of finding works on the AO3. Around the same number of people skipped this question as the last, 831 (14%) -- which again can be divided into the 230 people who are bypassing the whole Archive section, the 368 who answered they hadn't 'used the Archive's search function' and 233 who skipped this question intentionally.

The majority of respondents found the search "Somewhat efficient" (51.9%) or "Very efficient" (24.4%), giving us a total of 89,9% of respondents who have a positive opinion of the Search function. On the other hand, 13.9% found it "Inefficient" and a 4.2% found it "Very inefficient", adding up to 18,1% who have a negative opinion. This is more than double the percentage of people who had a negative opinion of the tagging system.

5.5% of respondents expressed neutrality by choosing 'no particular opinion'.

As we've noted in the analysis of the answers to question #12, responses may have been different if the answer scale used the exact same vocabulary for its positive and negative sides -- the fact that one could not answer 'somewhat inefficient' may have pushed people holding more moderately negative opinions towards neutrality (not wanting to answer 'inefficient' outright) while one could, in fact, answer 'somewhat efficient', perhaps attenuating the possible positive responses and thus encouraging them. The influence of the phrasing, however, can't be measured, and this is only one interpretation of its possible effects.

graph for question 16, description in the text above.

#17 -- Did you find content in your fandom(s) on the Archive?

Answer options Response count Response percentage
Yes, always or most of the time 4201 81.5%
Only sometimes 634 12.3%
Same volume as anywhere else 250 4.9%
Rarely 67 1.3%
No, never 0 0.0%
Answered question (n) 5152
Skipped question 834

Question #17 addresses AO3 content, asking if users' fandoms were represented in the Archive's content. 834 people skipped this question (14%) -- this again gives us 236 people skipping this question intentionally, with the others skipping it automatically as a consequence of previous answers.

Not surprisingly, most people said 'Yes', with 4,201 (81.5%) finding content most of the time and only 634 (12.3%) finding it only sometimes. No one said they never found such content, and 250 (4.9%) said they found it in the same quantities as elsewhere. Only 67 (1.3%) said they rarely found their fandoms at the AO3.

These answers are logical if one considers that it would be unusual to keep using an archive when one was unable to use it for one of its main purposes. One important aspect we did not take into account, however, is multi-fannishness. That is, respondents might find many works in one of their fandoms, but few or none in their other fandom(s), and the question design did not allow them to differentiate this. Judging from the overall positive slant, we assume that multifannish people tended towards answering with their well-represented fandom(s) in mind rather than their underrepresented one(s).

graph for question 17, description in the text above.

As a final note for this section, we note that the number of people choosing not to answer (or 'skip') a question has mostly stayed constant through the analysed questions, being around 200.

Mirrored from an original post on the OTW blog. Find related news by viewing our tag cloud.


Post Header

2012-07-16 13:33:48 UTC

This week* on Survey Sunday, we're taking a look at some stats regarding news outlets and awareness of the OTW.

* We planned to post all these posts to the AO3 as well as to the main OTW news blogs, since so many AO3 users responded to the survey, but your friendly neighbourhood crossposter overlooked this post and the next! Sorry, folks! Hopefully those of you on the edge of your seats for news of the OTW survey saw the master post!

These questions read as follows:

77. How did you first hear about the OTW?: [Closed question]
78. I first heard of the OTW by way of this project: [Closed question]
79. The OTW hosts the following projects under its umbrella: [Closed question]
80. Which OTW projects are most important to you? [Closed question]
81. The OTW is represented on a variety of communication platforms. Which of these OTW online outlets have you read or heard of? [Closed question + write-in field]
82. We post the following types of content to our OTW online outlets. Which ones are you interested in, generally speaking? [Closed question]
83. What type of content would you like to see (more of) on the OTW online outlets? [Text box]

About the answers

All the graphs and discussion here represent final numbers for these questions. Readers may notice that this set of questions has a very high rate of people skipping the questions compared to other questions in the survey. Survey fatigue likely accounts for some of the skips appearing in today's set of questions, although as the final questions about the OTW website actually had fewer people skipping them and 36% of all survey takers took the time to write in answers for the final survey question this is probably not the primary reason. One of the responses to that final question specifically pointed out that the survey should have included more "not sure/don't remember" options so, as will be seen in discussion of Question #83 below, a good many of the skips likely also indicated that the respondent simply wasn't sure of their answer. In addition we'll discuss how the survey structure led some people to never see some of these questions.

OTW Awareness

Questions #77 and 78 were quite similar in asking for memories of initial contact. The 82% of all respondents (4,920) who skipped Question #77 did so primarily because they had been redirected to Question #79 once they answered in Question #75 that they had been members of the OTW. People who skipped #75 also ended up being directed straight to Question #79.

Question #77 actually did have a "Don't remember" option, but it was only chosen by 84 people (7.9%). Nearly equal number of respondents chose a fandom community (453 or 42.5%) as their first site of OTW awareness or word-of-mouth (444 or 41.7%). Very small numbers of people chose "An OTW Project" (48 or 4.5%), "Panel discussion at a fannish convention" (24 or 2.3%) or "Panel discussion at an academic conference" (4 or 0.4%). Particularly negligible were mentions of the OTW in the general media (9 or 0.8%).

The survey questions to come suggest that another major reason for the skips to this question is that many survey respondents had never heard of the OTW before taking the survey, and the option "Only heard of it today" was not available.

Question #78 had an enormous number of skips because only the 48 people who answered "Through an OTW project" in the previous question were offered this question. Not surprisingly, the AO3 accounted for almost all the responses, 45 or 93.8%. The remaining 3 respondents selected either Fanlore, Transformative Works & Cultures (TWC), or Legal Advocacy.

OTW Project Interest and Awareness

Question #79, however, offered all the respondents a chance to express their familiarity with OTW projects. A significant number of people still skipped this question (2,025 or 34%). Given the familiarity shown with the AO3 in most of the survey it is perhaps more surprising that there were any respondents who had never heard of it (59 or 1.5%) with the vast majority having used it (3,792 or 96%). While a significant number of people had not heard of Fanlore (1,008 or 25.9%), many more had (1,277 or 32.8%) or were users (1,608 or 41.3%). While there were fewer users of the TWC (362 or 9.4%) there were still a good many survey takers who had heard of it (1,688 or 43.7%), with 1,815 (47%) not having heard of it.

There was a huge drop off when it came to use of the OTW's other projects, however this was largely due to the restricted circumstances under which someone would do so. For example, while 52.1% of respondents knew of the OTW's Legal Advocacy efforts, only 23 (0.6%) claimed to have directly benefited from them. Similarly, 31.5% (1,211) of respondents knew of Open Doors, though only 41 (1.1%) had used it. Given that the OTW had yet to do its first import, from the Smallville Slash Archive, this is not surprising.

Lastly was the Fan Video projects which prompted the least recognition with 69.8% of respondents (2,677) unaware of it and only 65 (1.7%) having used it. However, given that fans were most likely to know of the project (1,095 or 28.5%) if they were vidders or heard of it through fans involved in making fan videos, this still seems like a fairly high number of people.

Question #80 took a different tack by asking not about people's knowledge or use but about their level of interest in OTW projects. Slightly more people skipped this question (2,144 or 36%) and most chose the AO3 with 3,575 or 93.1% of respondents. Legal advocacy barely edged out Fanlore as the second priority project with 896 (28.1%) choosing it and 880 (27.6%) choosing Fanlore. Legal support for fans was also the top third choice, with 479 (16.3%) choosing it and 117 (3%) making it their first choice.

Given the general lack of knowledge about Fan Video projects in Question #79 it's not surprising that this choice came in last as one of the top three options (6.5%) with about double the remaining people choosing Open Doors for one of those slots (532 or 14%).

Also of significance are the 35 people (0.9%) who didn't find any of the OTW projects of importance to them, and the 22% (842) people who had no second or third choices. An additional 1005 people (26%) found they couldn't decide on a second or third choice.

News About the OTW

Questions #81 and 82, which dealt with OTW news and information, had high rates of people skipping the question. Question #81 was skipped by 32% of survey takers.

Question #81 asks about which of 9 distribution/communication platforms respondents either used or were aware of. Of the 4,052, or 67% who did answer, the highest response was for AO3 administrative posts, with 77.6% or 3,146 claiming to be aware of it. This outlet was listed separately from the OTW's various Twitter accounts, which includes AO3_Status and ao3org, and had the third highest response, 1,699 or 41.9%. Chances are that many more people are now aware of the Twitter accounts and the admin posts due to the archive slowdowns. Over one weekend over 1000 additional people began following AO3_Status, which is by far the most followed of any of the OTW news outlets with 6,463 readers.

The second highest response was to the OTW website with 1,862 or 46%. This number was largely consistent with those responding to Question #84 where 1,772 or 35.7% claimed to have read the website before (a difference of only 90 people). Remaining responses were the otw_news mirrors at fannish sites such as LiveJournal or personal RSS feeds for 1,139 people or 28.1%, the Fanlore community on Dreamwidth at 973 or 24%, and 547 people (13.5%) who listed OTW gift merchandise as a point of organizational awareness.

There were also 458 (11.3%) respondents who knew of the OTW's Facebook page, 435 (10.7%) who knew of Fanlore's administrative posts and 309 (7.6%) who had met an OTW representative at an event. There were 123 write-in responses (3%) and they broke down in the following general categories:

1) None of the above (39 people)
2) One of the options already listed (21 people)
3) Were not aware of the OTW before doing the survey (7 people)
4) Random mention online (6 people)
5) Don't know (4 people)

The highest response was "Word of mouth" (46 people) where the respondent "overheard" or saw discussion in their fannish circles. This was most often being done by people who work for the OTW as staffers or volunteers.

Question #82 also had a high skip rate, with 2,042 or 34% of people not answering what sort of news they were interested in. Of the 3,944 people who did answer, 3,396 or 86.1% claimed to be interested in news about the AO3 through its updates. This number is slightly higher than the people who answered in Question #81 that they were aware of AO3 administrative posts. This suggests that Question #81 either split people who were following news on the AO3 site vs. its Twitter accounts, or else people previously unaware that such news existed were now interested in receiving it.

The second highest news of interest was about specific topics or alerts on matters such as on copyright legislation (2,360 or 59.8%). The third and fourth highest response rates were very close, with 1,722 people (43.7%) interested in the fandom Links Roundup posts, and 1,684 (42.7%) interested in project activity announcements other than those for the AO3.

At the bottom of the news interest scale was information about the inner workings of the OTW. The OTW Newsletter had 1,316 or 33.4% following it. There was then a steep drop for volunteer role posts, of interest to 750 or 19%, and OTW Committee Spotlights with 505 (12.8%).

Overall, questions #81 and 82 suggest that at least a third of respondents are either uninterested or completely unaware of news related to the OTW and its projects, and that the greatest interest is for information of changes and updates to the AO3. Of more significance for the overall survey results, and OTW Communications strategy, is that despite the varied communication outlets the OTW maintains, the footprint of people it reaches is relatively small, at least if the news is related to things other than the archive.

Getting to Specifics

The final question, #83, asked survey takers "What type of content would you like to see (more of) on the OTW online outlets?". Only 614 people answered this, resulting in a skip rate of 90%. In fact, the number would likely have been higher because it appears some people believed that all questions required a response for them to continue with the survey. The largest group of answers was "Don't know" or even random characters to create a response (212 or 34%). Although at least one of the "Don't knows" was such a dedicated survey taker that they commented about how they would have felt guilty in leaving the question blank!

An additional group of respondents, 48 (8%) mentioned that prior to taking the survey they had been either unaware of the OTW or of its news outlets so they didn't feel qualified to offer any suggestions. Given some of the comments made in response to this and other questions in the survey it seems that one of the survey's successes was in alerting users previously familiar only with the AO3 as to what the OTW was and what sort of things it did. Some people were quite interested in finding out more once they realized this, with one respondent even suggesting that the OTW run another survey in a year's time as they would be interested in taking it again once they could sufficiently answer more of its questions. Others, though, declared themselves uninterested in OTW news or any of the org's other aspects as they were interested solely in utilizing the AO3 (32 or 5.2%).

Of the people who did offer specific suggestions, the responses were quite varied and indicated that people took this question to mean a variety of things. Despite its following a question listing examples of what news content the OTW produces, some fans seemed to take "its outlets" to mean "things posted on the archive." For example, 20 people (3.2%) asked for "how to" types of information, most of it focusing on features of the AO3, although some of it was in regards to information about volunteering. Another 47 people (7.6%) suggested that the OTW get deeply involved in producing fanworks, highlighting specific fanworks, fans, or fan groups, hosting fanwork contests, posting fanfic recommendations, etc. Some suggested that it should revive metafandom, a non-OTW fannish newsletter which linked to fandom meta posts hosted on LiveJournal (and later for a time, Dreamwidth) or, indeed, produce its own meta posts.

This last tied in with the group of people who made specific suggestions for content the OTW already produces (94 or 15%). A few of these people were expressing support for particular types of content that they liked. In other cases they seemed to be unaware that things they wanted were already available. This could be expected given how many users made it clear that they were either somewhat or very unfamiliar with the OTW and were previously unaware of any of its news outlets. An exception were a few requests for an outlet at Tumblr. At the time of the survey, while the OTW had had a blog registered there since 2011, the Tumblr outlet had only just been launched.

In other cases the unfamiliarity was likely due to the variety of projects and outlets the OTW has which people simply have not come across. In regards to the request for meta posts, the OTW's academic journal Transformative Works & Cultures (TWC) hosts a Symposium blog and is continually seeking new contributors to it, whether they make recurring or one-time posts. Similarly, some people asked for "academic articles" or "research about fans" which is the purview of the TWC, links to news about fans, which occur several times a week in the Links Roundup, OTW newsletters, which go out once a month, or information about the organization which can be found at the OTW website, such as where people can find news.

This group of respondents, however, was considered separately from people who either asked for more of the content already being created, or were looking for specific types of content which they might or might not already be aware of (49 or 8.4%). The largest group of these answers focused on legal matters, requesting more information about cases affecting fans, or activities of the OTW's Legal Committee. Open Doors was also a project cited several times, with an interest about fannish preservation. Other people asked for more news about specific volunteers (which have occasionally been made as "A Day in the Life" posts), about specific committees, for more frequent and detailed information about technical developments at the AO3, etc.

Another set of answers, which we grouped under the term "transparency", targeted more news about either OTW finances or its governance (41 or 6.6%). Another set of requests asked for greater representation of fans outside of western media fandoms, or of fans in non-English speaking countries (21 or 3.4%).

And lastly, 49 people (8.4%) declared themselves satisfied with what the OTW was producing in the way of news and information.

We have received questions since our last post that involved the AO3 section of the survey and we are still compiling some of the questions requested as well as awaiting some input from the related committees. We expect that those will be posted later in July.

In the meantime if you have an interest in some of the survey questions check out our list of all of them and tell us what you're curious about for the upcoming Survey Sundays!

Mirrored from an original post on the OTW blog. Find related news by viewing our tag cloud.


Post Header

2012-06-03 20:53:16 UTC

This week on Survey Sunday, we're taking a look at some illuminating stats regarding OTW membership: why fans join the OTW, why fans don't join, and why fans don't renew their membership. As always throughout this series, we are only offering aggregate results and summary comments rather than individual responses.

Today we're going to focus on the following submitted question:

  • "I'm interested in the answers to 73 and 74, and to a lesser extent 72. Basically I want to know what the roadblocks are that are preventing people from donating or that are making people decide to quit donating."

Before we show you those results, however, let's talk about data we're not showing you yet. In the last Survey Sunday, we fielded several queries from some of you regarding the Fanlore sections of the survey, including a great request for conclusions drawn from cross-referencing responses to multiple questions. We're currently working on those questions and eventually hope to provide you with all of that info and more, but there were too many essay-style responses for us to complete the Fanlore section for this Survey Sunday.

How we're working on the data

The survey workgroup in charge of combing through all ~6,000 responses has been organising and filtering the data almost from day one (that is, since the results came in), but only recently met for the first time to define goals and settle on a methodology. We agreed that before we can really know how to categorize the data we're dealing with, we need to get a clear overview of what the feedback actually is.

Since many questions can be grouped together by subject, we've split up into mini-teams that have agreed to work on each grouping, both individually and as an overall composite set of data, such as the 3 questions we're sharing with you today. Here's a bird's-eye view of the organization process for these mini-teams:

  1. preview the data and develop a good understanding of it
  2. report back to the group, share results with the relevant committees, gather feedback
  3. develop a group-wide organizational system
  4. work within the team to sort and categorize aggregate and open-ended results for each question

Once these steps are complete for all questions, we plan on digging into the guts of Surveymonkey's Export options, and possibly unleashing an Excel/SQL subgroup to work database magic and expand that preliminary analysis. At this level, we'll have the ability to cross-reference questions, filter by respondent data (like country or platform), and more. But we're not there yet! As we stated previously, we hope that sharing some preliminary data publicly as we proceed will help keep you updated and actively invested in the results.

Responses to questions on OTW membership

So, let's start with a look at 3 questions regarding OTW membership to give you an overview of what the OTW looks like in terms of donor motivation.

The lead-up question to this section was #70, "Have you ever been an OTW member?", serving as the gateway determining which follow-up questions were asked. Of the 5021 respondents, 730 were currently OTW members and proceeded to answer question 72, "What was your main reason for becoming a member?", but skipped questions 73 and 74. 226 had let their membership lapse and got question 73, "What made you stop being a member?", followed up by #74, "What might make you choose to be a member in the future?". This was also the question that the 4065 respondents were routed to who answered that they had never been members.

screenshot of a graph for the question Have you ever been an OTW member. 5021 answered, 965 skipped this question. Options: yes currently, 730 replies = 14.5%. yes but lapsed, 226 replies = 4.5%. no never, 4065 replies = 81%

(Please note that the replies to question 70 don't actually reflect current membership numbers: 965 people skipped the section entirely, and the number of members had increased during the April membership drive.)

Question #72: "What was your main reason for becoming a member?"

screenshot of a graph for the question What was your main reason for becoming and OTW member. 715 answered, 5271 skipped this question. Options: I wanted the right to vote in the elections, 52 replies = 7,3%. I wanted to support the organization financially, 343 = 48,0%. I wanted to show my general support for the organization, 314 replies = 43,9%. I joined because my friends are also members, 5 replies = 0,7%. I liked the incentive merchandise, 1 reply = 0,1%. Other (please specify), 50 replies


As you can see, the main motivation for respondents in choosing to donate to the OTW is support. "Support," of course, is a broad concept. In the open response portion of the question, a number of recurring themes emerged:

  • respondents wanted to do a combination of the options given to them, e.g. show general and financial support, or some form of "all of the above"
  • respondents wanted to support the OTW's legal advocacy, the Archive of Our Own, and/or other OTW projects
  • respondents wanted to have a vote in the OTW elections and a voice in the direction of the organization
  • respondents just wanted to give money to the OTW, but didn't realize they would become members as well/didn't realize they had a choice about also becoming a member
  • respondents donated as a way of making up for not having time or ability to volunteer
  • respondents donated as a way to express their belief in the value of the OTW

It bears repeating that all of this is a preliminary, broad overview of trends we saw in responses; as we categorize data we will look more closely at specific motivations people have for starting, renewing, and discontinuing their OTW membership.

The same principle goes for membership renewal, which was explored further in question 73.

Question #73: "What made you stop being a member?"

screenshot of a graph for the question What made you stop being a member?. 211 answered, 5775 skipped this question. Options: I forgot to renew membership, 90 replies = 42,7%.	
Financial reasons, 86 replies =	40,8%. I lost interest, 6 replies = 2,8%.
I feel there is a lack of progress, 3 replies = 1,4%. I don't feel represented by the OTW, 9 replies = 4,3%. I disagree with (aspects of) the OTW's policies or their development, 17 replies = 8,1%. Other (please specify), 22 replies.


It's important to remember that when we designed the survey, we included these particular options because we realize that acknowledging former member dissatisfaction is crucial to learning how to increase membership renewal. It's heartening to know that 42% of respondents might potentially renew their membership, but we also care about the 13-17% of former members who had negative or ambivalent experiences with the OTW after they donated to it. We appreciate these respondents, both for their initial memberships, and for taking the time to share their experiences as members with us.

It's harder to pick up on general themes for this question, especially due to the more contentious nature of the question, and the fact that we had fewer open responses to this question. However, some recurring trends from respondents were:

  • A combination of two or more of the closed-ended responses
  • Former members plan to renew but just haven't gotten around to it
  • Former members shifted their support to volunteer work instead for numerous reasons
  • Former members had negative experiences or received negative impressions during OTW election campaigns, or during their time as members

We hope to cross-analyze these types of responses with other responses to different aspects of the survey to glean more specific data about the things that hinder and help our efforts in this area.

Question #74: "What might make non-members join in the future?"

screenshot of a graph for the question What might make you choose to be a member in the future?. 3324 answered, 2662 skipped this question. Options: Nothing, the OTW is just not for me, 556 replies = 16,7%. Improvement in my finances, 1972 replies = 59,3%. Niftier incentives, 112 replies = 3,4%. Better progress on existing projects, 93 replies = 2,8%. Outreach to my fannish community, 205 replies = 6,2%. Services or tools that appeal to me or my fannish community, 336 replies = 10,1%.	Change in the organization's policies, 50 replies = 1,5%. Other (please specify), 484 replies.

If long-term and new membership are crucial to our health as an organization, then it doesn't take a team of SQL experts to see right away that there's a statistical correlation between the 13-17% of lapsed members from Question #73 who are unsatisfied with our organization's current fannish outreach, general policies, direction, and progress, and the 17-21% of potential members who cite solutions to these same issues as potential incentives to join.

However, this set of questions weren't designed to ask what creates levels of dissatisfaction—only to quantify the relationship between dissatisfaction and membership. Other parts of the survey will hopefully provide more context. What this data does provide us is a sharp, bird's-eye perspective on the rest of the survey: every area where we succeed or fall short, no matter how small, connects back to our actual membership numbers.

And while, alas, we can't control the state of your finances and we definitely understand that the OTW is not for everyone, there are many things we can change to impact membership for the better. We hope the survey analysis will ensure that the organization as a whole knows what we need to change and renews its commitment to do so at every level.

What we can't tell you right away, though, is what those numbers mean in terms of conclusions or future direction. Once our Development & Membership committee has had time to familiarize themselves with these results and discuss them in depth, we will be able to amend this report with their interpretations and conclusions. We will collect similar analyses from committees along with creating more reports, and compile it all into a more fleshed-out final report.

In the meanwhile, check our list of all survey questions and tell us what you're curious about for the next Survey Sunday post on June 17th!

Mirrored from an original post on the OTW blog. Find related news by viewing our tag cloud.


Pages Navigation