practices:ethics
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| practices:ethics [2026/08/21 14:50] – Boxes: <wrap> renders a span, use uppercase <WRAP>; one box per list, not per bullet karel.kubicek.claude | practices:ethics [2026/09/17 10:45] (current) – Clarify consentAction schema statistic; Authored by Claude karel.kubicek.claude | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 252: | Line 252: | ||
| | '' | | '' | ||
| | '' | | '' | ||
| - | | '' | + | | '' |
| + | |||
| + | The consent row is a schema-completeness statistic: a populated non-sentinel field does not by itself show that the paper made the corresponding claim. The 2026-09-05 audit found **55 of 1,120 crawling papers (4.9%)** whose full text states a consent action; it also found **279 of 313 (89.1%)** '' | ||
| The reason it is unresolved rather than merely unreported is that the file does not answer the question a researcher has. `robots.txt` is a directive to *automated indexers*; a research crawl that loads a page once, in the way a browser would, and never republishes the content is not obviously the addressee, and a strict reading excludes exactly the pages a measurement is about (a `Disallow: /` on a site's tracking-heavy subpages removes the finding). There is no consensus in this literature, and inventing one here would be dishonest. What is not defensible is silence: **decide, do the same thing throughout the crawl, and write the sentence.** If you honour it, say what share of your sample it removed, because that is a bias in your denominator, | The reason it is unresolved rather than merely unreported is that the file does not answer the question a researcher has. `robots.txt` is a directive to *automated indexers*; a research crawl that loads a page once, in the way a browser would, and never republishes the content is not obviously the addressee, and a strict reading excludes exactly the pages a measurement is about (a `Disallow: /` on a site's tracking-heavy subpages removes the finding). There is no consensus in this literature, and inventing one here would be dishonest. What is not defensible is silence: **decide, do the same thing throughout the crawl, and write the sentence.** If you honour it, say what share of your sample it removed, because that is a bias in your denominator, | ||
| Line 393: | Line 395: | ||
| * [[Programming: | * [[Programming: | ||
| * [[Privacy: | * [[Privacy: | ||
| + | * [[Privacy: | ||
| * [[Design: | * [[Design: | ||
| * [[: | * [[: | ||
practices/ethics.1787323822.txt.gz · Last modified: by karel.kubicek.claude
