Search results

AMEN! We hope someday you can have those same legal benefits with Murf too!

Hi again, everyone - we thank you again for the engagement on the board. While I'm not opposed to further conversation, we unfortunately don't have enough time to thoughtfully engage with each question on this particular board without coming across as "academics who don't really listen" or...

Please read the comments above, as we already cleared this up. As I've said before, in our efforts to clarify, we made it more confusing. Our mistake. We should have just said, "take the screening questions and see if you pass." To be in the survey, you need to be: 1. Non-monogamous, now or in...

I see what you're saying, MightyMax. You may not be distressed at all! I'll take your word for it. Others like dagferi said the survey made her feel "disgusted" so there's that. We welcome your apprehension - no reason to shut that down. Again though, we area not trying to represent the general...

I wonder if part of it is that perhaps this board receives more requests for research? IDK. I should ask some of the other places we've talked with people. It has felt oddly cranky here, but of course we are assuming that's for valid reasons. Some of the stuff here has been exhausting by...

Cue NBC music, "THE MORE YOU KNOW!" Thanks MightyMax - I have a lot to learn, particularly about solo poly. So you may be right - some solo poly folk may not be screened out. Looks like we're studying more people than was discussed on this board. As long as people pass the screening questions...

Thanks, yeah. It is SO complicated. Which makes data analysis near-impossible. Unfortunately things have to be simplified in quantitative research. If the study were qualitative that would be different.

Dagferi, please go back and read the previous comments. We cleared it up that it is not limited to relationships with an emotional hieararchy. We are only excluding solo poly, as far as I'm aware. We are also not going to say we are representing poly on the whole (in fact, we will explicitly...

Right - as I mentioned - by "triadic data analysis" I only meant statistical analysis involving three people, not polyamorous triads per se. Just another one of those "learning to communicate with each other" moments on this forum. :)

Right, of course. I was only referring to the madness of trying to do data analysis on three people, because they're connected by the one person. In that case we'd also have to limit the study to only triads or vees.

Hey Dagferi, you're back! I remember Murf and Butch from 100 comments ago. :) I hope they're equally doing well. No worries about the disgust - it's a useful emotion, right?!? I'm sincerely glad you've been able to balance two marriages, clearly it is very important to you that not anything make...

Thank you nycindie. I hope our efforts to engage here have been encouraging that we're not closed off completely to learning new things. :)

There has to be a current committed relationship, so you're right, having one in the past wouldn't count. Re: "legal marriage" - yeah I can see who that makes some uncomfortable (not threatened though, apparently). That and "commitment" do seem to be a difficult aspect of this study.

If they pass the screening questions, then yes they are included. My quote above appears to be misleading now. I apologize for that - in our attempts to clarify things it became more confusing. I should have just said, "thank you" and let people self-screen via the screening questions. :) That's...

I'm glad no one here is threatened, but again, many others have been, and have even been harmed by research. So good to know about this forum. As for the second half there, that's too bad. Yes we have limited and narrow interests and focus. It would be nice to be able to study "all the...

So in a sense, the non-monogamous adults we are excluding are: 1. People who report ZERO committed relationships (according to their own definition/views), in addition to not being legally married to anyone. That's it, it seems. Prioritizing one relationship over another isn't necessary. We do...

That's okay, I like to engage here. Besides, you can't really call me out for hubris and not wanting to learn, and then tell me I don't need to reply. :D Re: "very specific questions" and "very specific population" - yes, exactly. This is just one small study to address specific things. It is...

Makes sense Max. Thanks.

I'm sorry you feel you have to make me understand. Honestly, I think it may be that we both understand, and we just disagree. That's fine. We have many questions that require either a legal marriage and/or the participant self-reporting being in some sort of committed relationship (however they...

Glad to know - you'd think otherwise from this particular thread. :)