In order to observe the evidence of thirdplaceness and if the WishBoard installation had the same personal involvement than “Before I Die”, we verified the audience behavior, user acceptance, display effectiveness, privacy, and social impact. These issues are described by Alt et al. in  and we used his work to guide us in our analysis.
For audience behavior and user acceptance, we examined in the videos and notes how people behaved around the installation, if the installation promoted interaction between users and if there were regulars, people who used the place in the installation, sent messages in more than one period and invited other people to use the installation. Display effectiveness was analyzed by observing if people were attracted by the installation, looking, stopping in the place, and interacting with the installation and how long they stayed in the place. Finally, for privacy and social impact, we examined and classified the messages sent observing how the users expressed themselves when identification wasn’t needed..
Analyzing audience behavior and user acceptance, we observed that the people used the place to gather, to send messages and to speak of their common interests and what they saw in the WishBoard (see figure 5). People wanted to find out if there were messages for them. Some people started to send messages to others or joke about others; one person sent a message for itself pretending to be someone else. Some began competing with each other to see who sent the most creative message. Some wanted to show others their messages (see figure 6). Some people tried to take a photo of their message. We identified about seven regulars. Some of these regulars asked others what people wanted to post and then those regulars sent the message. The place became a space for students, professors, employees and visitors to share laughs and playful conversations (see figure 7).
In the analysis of display effectiveness, we observed that many of the passersby was attracted to the displays, turning the head at the installation area and 145 messages were sent in front of the displays. We observed that more than half of people who stopped in the place stayed for longer than a minute. About the secondary displays, people said that they didn’t perceive the connection between the messages that appeared in the secondary screens and the messages sent by them. This misunderstanding occurred because people posted few messages with verbs in the infinitive form and the Levenshtein algorithm doesn’t take into consideration the meaning of the sentences. The algorithm for choosing similar messages presented only random messages.
Considering privacy and social impact, we noticed that during the exposition, people sent 244 messages to the WishBoard....