Going through the entire classes mini-interviews very much helped me get a grasp of what Second Life is to the thousands of people who use it everyday. From my own personal interviews, I found that the people I spoke to thought of Second Life as a place they could be someone else, or more accurately a networking tool. People talked about their many friends from all over the world, or the friends they made in real life after meeting them on Second Life. However, the people I spoke with were all new to Second Life. Upon reading the other answers from the class, I had a lot more information to analyze.
There were a variety of different responses, which of course can be attributed to the thousands of differences and variety of contexts. Each interviewer is different, each interviewee, place, time, manner in which interview was conducted, etc. The list of differences can be endless, so one must factor that in when analyzing.
Despite all of this, however, a lot of the responses were surprisingly similar. Many avatars discussed how Second Life was a different world for them, a place to be someone they're not in real life. Others discussed it as a nice networking tool. Many people took it literally and called a "chatroom with graphics" or something to that effect. I found these by reading the various interviews, and marking a number next to a brand new definition or idea, and then repeating that number when another response was the same to the original correlating number.
With such a plethora and variety of data, it was definitely a lot harder to go through and analyze, only because of its tendancy to be tedious. However, with so much information, and the number of consistant responses being from such a variety of users, I found the data to be much more conclusive and accurate than from my personal five interviews. So my conclusion seems to be "the more data, the better!"