Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 35: |
Line 35: |
|
| |
|
| When we meet, these sessions will be run with ''no presentations'' and ''no formal introductions''. The plan to just jump in and start answering the questions and talking about thing we've all already read. | | When we meet, these sessions will be run with ''no presentations'' and ''no formal introductions''. The plan to just jump in and start answering the questions and talking about thing we've all already read. |
|
| |
| Proposed norms:
| |
| * '''Take the entire group as an audience''': the best feedback is beneficial or thought-provoking to the group as a whole, prompts group discussion/consideration, asks a question, etc.
| |
| * If the author is your only audience, '''be practical and actionable for the project's current stage'''. Early-stage work is expected to be a little unpolished and crunchy, and proposing a large new branch of analysis for a nearly-complete work should be approached with a scoping statement (Must this be done for the work to be valid? Or are you proposing a follow-up line of inquiry to be stated in the Future Work section?)
| |
| * '''Don't dogpile''' -- time is short, so even positive plus-ones should be brief: don't repeat what others have said, don't feel the need to chime in or pile on a critique: it is assumed that you read the paper and are supportive of the author.
| |
| * '''Avoid vaguebooking'''. "Framework needs some work" or "Lacking some flow" isn't as useful as "I don't think you're getting a lot out of using Foucault, Latour, and Habermas here, and explaining them is pretty heavy -- maybe you can get away with just invoking Benkler and moving on" and experience-grounded comments like "When you transitioned from section 2 to section 3, and half-way through section 4, I ended up flipping back to the abstract to figure out what was going on".
| |
| * '''Don't narrate the typo you found on line 156''': feedback best conveyed via a marked-up draft should be delivered via a marked-up draft.
| |
|
| |
|
| === Unconference === | | === Unconference === |
