A case study of what not to do when trying to research Internet-based phenomena/groups? For those of you not on LiveJournal academics_anon, here's the summary, quoted from the community post: "A researcher affiliated with Boston University named Ogi Ogas decided to do a survey of various LiveJournal fanfiction/fandom groups. Unfortunately: 1. Despite repeatedly mentioning his association with BU, it appears he never got IRB approval. 2. This research wasn't even for a project at BU; it was for a privately published book. (A book titled, incidentally, Rule 34: What Netporn Teaches Us About The Brain. I am not making this up.) 3. Because of the subject, the survey was quite explicit in some parts (and flat-out triggering in others). Yet it was posted to all-ages communities with nothing even resembling a warning. 4. After criticism of a number of the questions (on counts ranging from cisgender and heterosexual privilege to just plain squick), the researcher actually changed the survey while data was still actively being collected. 5. Edited to add: Oh yeah, and some of the questions had to do with illegal drugs and sexual activity, despite there being no privacy statement or anything else of the sort." Summaries of the drama: http://viv.id.au/blog/20090831.6431/ten-steps-to-a-perfect-fanstorm/ http://linkspam.dreamwidth.org/5800.html And the questionnaire itself: http://ljgeoff.livejournal.com/296228.html