Editing CommunityData:Critique and Feedback Session

==> Organizing a C + F? Check our [[Facilitator Tips]]

=== Before the Session ===

If you are submitting to a Critique and Feedback Session, please be aware of a [[norm collection for submitters]].

If you're attending, expectations are in our [[norm collection for attendees]].

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.

=== During the Session===

==== Norms and Values ====

* '''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.

If you don't get a chance to give your feedback verbally, you can send the author a marked up PDF or make notes on the Etherpad / Riseup Pad during the C&F session.

==== Facilitation Process ====

* '''If you want to voice feedback, please type your initials in the chat'''. After you've finished speaking, call on the next person. The moderator may step in if this process hits any hiccups.
* '''Mute your microphone''' unless you've been called on to speak by the moderator.
* If you're having connectivity issues, consider directly connecting to your router and / or turning off your video feed.
* Use the etherpad / shared document to give feedback if we run out of time and don't get to your feedback.
* Please be mindful of your own time when you have the mic. You can keep an eye on the 'Speaker Stats' feature in Jitsi to make sure you are being fair. Make your points quickly and point to examples.

Hi,

We'd like to introduce to you our explainer video service, which we feel can benefit your site wiki.communitydata.science.

Check out some of our existing videos here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWz-ELfJVEI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y46aNG-Y3rM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJCFX1AjHKk

All of our videos are in a similar animated format as the above examples, and we have voice over artists with US/UK/Australian/Canadian accents.
We can also produce voice overs in languages other than English.

They can show a solution to a problem or simply promote one of your products or services. They are concise, can be uploaded to video sites such as YouTube, and can be embedded into your website or featured on landing pages.

Our prices are as follows depending on video length:
Up to 1 minute = $259
1-2 minutes = $379
2-3 minutes = $489

*All prices above are in USD and include an engaging, captivating video with full script and voice-over.

If this is something you would like to discuss further, don't hesitate to reply.

Kind Regards,
Kate