Had a good meeting for lunch today with Paul Dourish at UC Irvine, chatting about my PhD research and on-going projects here and there. It seems that he's back on writing about space and place, which is very relevant to what I do. Some raw notes from what he said about my research:

he acknowledged my concerns about articulating both quantitative and qualitative data (but seems to me very inerested in my qualitative analyses)

do we really need to model other's positions (in the game + ...): that's actually something we discuss with the dispositional versus situational Mutual Modeling.

He's interested in the following question: to what extent the technology provides a medium for people to develop a meaning of others' actions. In my context, this is related with how people interpret others' paths.

Would it be possible to dig my qualitative data to go deeper into Mutual Modeling of location, MM towards the goal and MM of strategy? For him, there should be more emphasis on qualitative data, like ethnographical analyses to understand how people discuss, understand and use other's paths/locations

the visualization thing made him think about chalmers' students work (maybe I should more articulate this with what I want to do with the viz?)

He asked why choosing the path distance as a performance index: it's meant to foster more strategy discussion among players (+ prevent them from running and possibly break the tablet pcs)

He also encouraged me to submit a poster to ubicomp, I may write something about the asynchronous awareness tool, let's see.