Much thanks on the feedback.
I've carefully considered/reviewed that and some other feedback, and made at least some changes. (it did, unfortunately, get a wee bit longer, but it does also now early, and much more clearly indicate what's required vs. optional - so zipping through just the required bits (contact info. + checking some buttons/boxes) can be rather to quite quick to complete).
There are also numerous small tweaks throughout - which hopefully mostly improves things at least a wee bit in various places.
Anyway, it's "live" now - I'll have the URL to take the survey / ("complete the application") out fairly soon (starting later today).
Quoting "Andrew Fife" andrewbfife@yahoo.co.uk:
Here are my suggestions for improvement... please take all as IMHO.
In general the questions themselves feel unnecessarily long.
Question #3, the distinctions between IT worker and IT consultant and in -house vs. outsourced recruiter don't seem important. Maybe these four options could be rewritten and combined as "IT administrator" and "Recruiter/HR"
Question #4, seems like most programmers I'm friends with prefer the title developer, but this is not a big deal.
Question #5, does location really matter? If not, I'd delete this question.
Question #6, can this be rewritten as "Would you pre fer to be a panelist or moderator?" with yes/no or panelist/moderator options?
Question #7: this question feels like an interview question that could be intimidating to some. I'd maybe rewrite it as "What would you like to talk about on the panel." While this wouldn't cover those who want to moderate, their bio is likely to speak to their qualifications.
Question #8, this feels very long. I'd shorten it to "Please provide a 1-2 paragraph bio that BALUG can use publicly."
Question #9, references seem like overkill and I'd delete this question.