Hello everyone, as a PhD student I conduct research about change & people who stand up for important matters in society. This particular survey is about products which concern a lot of us and can affect every one of us. Please help making this research happen. Would some of you be interested in participating in this research? It's easy, takes around 30 minutes & you can win a voucher. Please help and participate! Thank you! Best wishes, Petra

This is the link to the survey:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/makechanges

Done the survey and recommend it.

Has this format and means of delivery been passed by the university Ethics Committee?

It looks dodgy to me.

Dear Petra,

This has all the hall marks of a very ugly piece of academic socialism. If you have support or this from your University I would be inviting them into the office for a discussion about their superannuation and the old long brown envelope.

Key phrases of concern;

<<people who stand up for important matters in society.>>

What people? Important to whom? Who decides? What part of “society”?

<< The survey focuses on a range of products which some consumers are concerned about but can affect every one in our society. There are various questions about the nature of any concerns and the ability of individuals to make a change.>>

Who are the “some consumers”? Who is determining how products “can effect”? Why would they be concerned about “everyone in our society”? How do you propose to affect “the ability of individuals to make a change”? What “changes” do you have in mind?

There is more than enough Nanny State research about and we don’t need any more “Activists Handbooks” thank you.

I agree with TBC this looks very dodgy, and if it isn’t dodgy it is of even greater concern.

Sorry Petra, not buying.

Dear Spindoc,

As I see it, this research is all about how much or otherwise we are willing to fight against influences that harm us, not about the nanny state. I think that the issues themselves were selected not for their content, but merely for their ability to annoy us, in order to research the link between our degree of annoyance and our actual willingness to take arms to avert the problem.

I also strongly oppose the nanny state, but if there is any justification whatsoever for having a state in the first place, then it is to protect its members from harm by others. Since we are too weak to oppose such powerful harming influences (I will not mention them by name to avoid spoiling the survey for others) on our own, and since taking actual arms (as in Libya) is not a feasible option in Australia, then calling desperately on the government to save us, does not constitute an encouragement of the nanny state.

Dear Petra,

I've just completed your survey. It was absolutely painless
and fun (and anonymous). Thank You for inviting me to participate. And every success with your PhD.

All The Best.