Difference between revisions of "Talk:Shane Levine"

Revision as of 00:44, 22 February 2018

Samantha Cohen (samcoh): I really liked the story in the beginning of your section titled "Who is this Guy". It immediately grabbed me in, and I wanted to continue to read your piece. I think this beginning section would be much stronger if you take out the sentence where you say "…as we know no social media platform accurately represents the whole picture". I think this statement is easily arguable, and weakens the section. The proceeding sentences following this, continuing up until you ask "who is Shane on the internet?, could be used in your concluding section. Also, in your ending section you should consider summarizing what your different identities on various platforms say about you. You could maybe talk about how in isolation the platforms do not represent your full identity, but together they paint a more realistic picture of who you are offline? Overall, I really like how you wrote this like a timeline of your social media usage, and this was very entertaining to read!!

I really like your introduction where you give the reader basic background information about yourself before launching into your online presence — this gives a good jumping off point for the reader to evaluate how your social media platforms do and do not reflect your biographical information and how this differs from your personality traits. The transitions between sections could be clearer. I can see how your Facebook presence is literally and figuratively narrowed down to your Instagram feed, but the jump from Instagram to LinkedIn is abrupt. To me, LinkedIn is a vastly different network than Facebook and Instagram, which both cater more to personality reflections shared with friends. You touched on how you wanted 500+ connections on LinkedIn, and I think you could elaborate more on how that might differ from your Facebook and Instagram, where you said you did not want validation on social media. What about LinkedIn makes you value the quantity over quality of connections? The conclusion could be stronger in tying back to the introduction and maybe address how your online personas do and don’t relate to the biographical identity you first presented. -Amelia Cacchione

Shameel Latif (latifsha): Your introduction really caught my attention, titled 'Who is this Guy' was very clever. This drew me in and made me want to continue reading throughout the entire post. The story of Shanaynay Wobbleggigle was quite funny and aided to me wanting to continue reading throughout the post. The structure of the post overall was well done. I think paragraph to paragraph it flowed very well and made the entire post seem fluid. I noted however that you could restructure 'The whole persona of a being is made up of intricate and complex facets of thoughts, opinions, interests, style, and appearance. It’s really up to the user to decide how much and what of their identity they want to share in cyberspace. Often, people share selectively. I know I do. To understand my virtual identity, it’s helpful to first get a glimpse of the real live Shane. Now that’s not so easy to do through this screen but here are photos of me from different social media platforms to start' to be more intertwining. I felt as if you jumped from idea to idea here. I think the post overall could benefit from a concluding paragraph that ties everything together. I noticed that your post lacks one, and an addition of one would improve it overall.

You engaged with the assignment very well, and I feel you seriously assessed your identity in the various social media platforms you referenced. You accurately talked about your online identity while describing how you formed your online presence in depth. While the structure of the entire piece was clearly drawn out, from section to section you could think of adding transition that make it overall more connected.

The writing structure was appropriate overall. I think you did a very good job in how you communicated yourself to the audience. The writing had a good style, flowed logically, and had correct grammar throughout. Aside from the possible flow change that I mentioned earlier I think you did a very good job overall.