Difference between revisions of "Talk:Roy Okerstrom"
(→Taylor Jones' Comment) |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
I really enjoyed reading your MediWIki post, namely because of your interesting personal background regarding your separate (Roy vs. Teddy) identities. I think that you were able to establish your ‘voice’ through talking in the 3rd person; this functioned well and was creative. | I really enjoyed reading your MediWIki post, namely because of your interesting personal background regarding your separate (Roy vs. Teddy) identities. I think that you were able to establish your ‘voice’ through talking in the 3rd person; this functioned well and was creative. | ||
| − | However, in your revision I would be careful with your use of casual language and perhaps use “you” less. There’s definitely a fine line between coming off as authentic and being too colloquial with language, but I think that your post could certainly benefit from a bit more formality with phrasing. Further, your post included a lot of relevant and reflective analysis, but was generally vague, and could | + | However, in your revision I would be careful with your use of casual language and perhaps use “you” less. There’s definitely a fine line between coming off as authentic and being too colloquial with language, but I think that your post could certainly benefit from a bit more formality with phrasing. Further, your post included a lot of relevant and reflective analysis, but was generally vague, and could have been more thoroughly tied to class readings/concepts. In your section addressing why Teddy is the way he is, you describe how your social media presence is entirely composed of what friends tag you in, which is a perfect example of how "secondary elements of your identity" dominate Teddy’s data profile. I would more explicitly state this in the final version. |
Overall, I think you did a good job of acknowledging the degree to which your data profile represents authenticity, but consider also addressing the notions of embodiment and temporality as well (as advised in the the 4b(?) lecture slides.) With that being said, the structure/content/approach of your post was very clever and unique, and I liked they way you explained how the composition of these identities do reflect your values -both work and fun. | Overall, I think you did a good job of acknowledging the degree to which your data profile represents authenticity, but consider also addressing the notions of embodiment and temporality as well (as advised in the the 4b(?) lecture slides.) With that being said, the structure/content/approach of your post was very clever and unique, and I liked they way you explained how the composition of these identities do reflect your values -both work and fun. | ||
Latest revision as of 18:13, 19 February 2019
Matthew Steinberg's Comment First of all, I thought this was very interesting and well written. I can tell that you spent a lot of time planning out how you were going to talk about your “different personalities” and it made your post very stimulating and caught my interest throughout. It is an interesting take that you decide to talk about the information that you can control especially when I see that many people do the opposite and talk about the information that they can’t. I think you should try to include information about Roy that you found online besides your social media. When it comes to the Teddy part of your post and conclusion, I think you do a great job analyzing your data identity that you can/can not control as well as bringing both sides together to warp it up. Overall, really well written and definitely one of the more intriguing posts that I have read. - Matthew Steinberg
Taylor Jones' Comment
Roy, I really enjoyed reading your MediWIki post, namely because of your interesting personal background regarding your separate (Roy vs. Teddy) identities. I think that you were able to establish your ‘voice’ through talking in the 3rd person; this functioned well and was creative.
However, in your revision I would be careful with your use of casual language and perhaps use “you” less. There’s definitely a fine line between coming off as authentic and being too colloquial with language, but I think that your post could certainly benefit from a bit more formality with phrasing. Further, your post included a lot of relevant and reflective analysis, but was generally vague, and could have been more thoroughly tied to class readings/concepts. In your section addressing why Teddy is the way he is, you describe how your social media presence is entirely composed of what friends tag you in, which is a perfect example of how "secondary elements of your identity" dominate Teddy’s data profile. I would more explicitly state this in the final version.
Overall, I think you did a good job of acknowledging the degree to which your data profile represents authenticity, but consider also addressing the notions of embodiment and temporality as well (as advised in the the 4b(?) lecture slides.) With that being said, the structure/content/approach of your post was very clever and unique, and I liked they way you explained how the composition of these identities do reflect your values -both work and fun.
