网络社交工具调查

清华大学人机交互实验室--网络社交工具调查

亲爱的朋友，您好：

这是一次由清华大学可用性与人机交互研究中心进行的学术调查，目的是了解您对于网络社交服务的看法和态度。网络社交服务是所有基于互联网技术、帮助用户和他人进行沟通交流、维系社会关系以及建立个人形象的服务的总称。调查结果将增进我们对于网络社交服务中的用户需求的理解，帮助我们提出网络社交服务的设计准则。

我们真诚欢迎您参与本次调查，您的回答和个人信息将被只用作研究之用，不会以任何形式被直接引用或者透露给第三方。

为了鼓励并奖励您的参与，我们将在本次调查结束后，从有效问卷中随机抽出10%，给予50元的奖励。我们将通过电子邮件与您联系，如果您愿意参加抽奖，请一定留下真实有效的邮件地址。此外，在调查结束后我们将发送一份调查报告副本到您的邮箱，以备您对此有进一步的兴趣。

再次感谢您的参与！

地址：
http://uxmania.com/limesurvey/index.php?sid=49378&lang=zh-Hans
（教育网用户须出国，给您带来的不便请谅解）

清华大学 皋琴 博士
戴雨森
范藻
康若谷
孙超
吴双
北京航空航天大学 杨远骋

拿到了白纸一张的课表

选课就自己选帮别人选了一堆二外 日语2 3 德语2 法语1

比较搞笑的是还帮五字班选了物流管理概论 原因是系里为了控制大家一窝蜂去物流方向的热情 bobo的这门课容量只有30 谁抽上了谁才能去物流方向
现在的局面就是五字班八仙过海各显神通 目前行情是容量30的课余量-53 大概有略高于1/3的概率抽中 预计中签率在明天收盘前还会有小幅下降

分个方向居然要用抽签解决 不知道系里是不是觉得当初还不如不分

其实我挺想不通为什么大家如此热爱物流方向的 这架势IE系可以改名LE了 Logistics Eng.

难道真是因为说自己学工业工程没人知道 说学的是物流就OK了？

刚做完老板要的review

白天不好好干活只有晚上熬夜了

被CHI2008光荣reject

没有做学术的天分 我还是老老实实读个master工作去吧

不过顶级会议就是顶级会议啊

acceptance rate只有18%

p.s.有一个审稿人居然还很认真的指出了我几个语法错误，，，

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Zao Fan,

Thank you very much for submitting to CHI 2008 Notes. We are sorry to
tell you that we are not able to include your Notes submission, 145,
Personality Need Factors and Social Web Service, in the conference
program.

We received 340 submissions and were able to accept 18% of them, which
required making difficult choices and rejecting several submissions
that were highly rated by some of their reviewers. The decisions as
to which submissions to accept were made after careful reviews by a
number of highly qualified professionals around the world. At the end
of this message are the reviews for your submission. We hope these
will be useful to you.

If you submitted a rebuttal to the reviews, be assured that it was
read by a member of the program committee. We appreciate your
participation in the research community and look forward to future
submissions of your work.

------------------------ Paper 145, Review 1 ------------------------
Overall Rating

3 (3 - Possibly reject: This seems below the line, but I'm not
deadset against it. )

------------------------ Paper 145, Review 2 ------------------------
Overall Rating

2 (Reject: I would argue for rejecting this paper.)

------------------------ Paper 145, Review 3 ------------------------
4 (Borderline: Overall I would not argue for accepting or rejecting
this paper.)