Talk:Mark Buckner

Peer Review 1
I like how you formatted the article with each primary element of your Facebook profile given its own section for discussion, although you did forget to talk about any of your other pictures besides your current profile picture. The tone for the article was pretty serious, with occasional humorous quips at the "disingenuous nature of the Facebook game" that really helped to drive your point home about the self-awareness needed for an online persona to be genuine in the slightest. Each section contains sufficient information about each element of your Facebook profile and why you have it like that, except for the Statuses section. Since you claim this to be "the largest way [you] construct [your] identity via Facebook," I would like to know a little bit more about your typical status update or comment on a friend's status.
-Vince Zobel

Peer Review 2
The format for your analysis was creative and illustrative, but while a lot of effort was clearly given to the form of the piece and the illustrative content, some of the accompanying text was a little sparse. I admire the conciseness with which you approached the assignment and the utility of the text you provided is impressive, but it does your analysis and argument a disservice in some sections. I feel like there's a lot of analysis that could have been done that wasn't -- like Vince mentioned above, why do you feel like status updates provide a more accurate representation of your idea of yourself, outside of their being "open and unique", and why not elaborate on what makes them a more open and unique method of constructing your Facebook identity? I agree with the point pretty strongly, but think that you could have gone a little further in your discussion of it.

Most of my criticism comes out of interest. There are a lot of really interesting and valid points raised here, tell me more about them!
-Eric Monaghan