PWR2: E-Rhetorics

Blogging

2004-11-08T13:06:00.000-08:00

OK, so I'm going to just give my opinion on the following blogging methods for next quarter's class:

research log
expressivist
content-response
discussion
commenting

Last quarter we maintained a research blog. That wasn't much fun. It is so boring writing about your research progress. Also, there is often very little to write about. This is like one of those "forced" blogs. Stay away!

The expressivist blog works fine because I feel that that's what blogs are meant to be. Informal yet meaningful writing where the author can convey his feelings.

Content-response may seem a bit more appropriate for a class, as long as the response is allowed to be slightly expressivist. I would hate for the response to be formed as an academic essay.

Discussions would only work if you (Christine) came up with the topics. You shouldn't delegate that kind of responsibility to a kid that's going to procrastinate 'til the last day before class and come up with some contrived discussion question.

I feel that the point of a blog is to have some type of collaboration with the readership, and commenting provides this functionality. It's fun commenting on someone else's post so long as we are not assigned a person. That would make it a "forced" post as well.

So, in conclusion, I think content-response is most appropriate for classroom blogging. I'm actually very satisfied with the current method in this class.

Wiki! Wiki! Wiki!

2004-11-08T10:11:00.000-08:00

Wiki falls under the broader scope of collaborative web pages. It is funny how I had just been thinking of transforming my personal website, where I sporadically post my personal musings or news, into a collaborative area where my friends can post their own entries. This would be great in relieving some of my burden in getting new content on the site frequently and also having to gauge what interests my audience.

The concept behind Wiki is awesome. It just reinforces that “openness” epitomized by open source software. Similar to how open source software has allowed for the creation of software that would not be made by proprietary vendors, Wiki has led to the development of some amazing sites. Wikipedia, for one, is beyond a regular encyclopedia. First, it hosts dozens of languages. Second, it has articles on items not typically included in traditional encyclopedias, such as current events, biographies of slightly-less-popular-though-still-prominent people, and other important items that corporations don’t find profitable for inclusion in their products. Third, it’s free and open!

Back to my website plans, don’t you think it would be cool to encourage some sort of collaboration on my site? My current method of accomplishing that goal is having a comment feature on my blog entries, but people rarely post comments. I feel that this may be because the level of collaboration it provides is not enough to make a commenter feel like an intrinsic part of my site.

You’ve got me convinced (or did I just convince myself). I will be converting my site to “Wiki” over Christmas break.

Rock the vote! (Just don't require special, proprietary IM software you idiots!)

2004-11-01T16:14:00.000-08:00

Using technology to get out the vote is a great idea. Using IM to get out the vote is a great idea. But requiring people to download specific IM clients to be able to participate in this scheme is a horrible idea. This is another example of a great idea with horrible logistics. The whole point behind this effort was to rally young non-voters. Such people aren’t going to download specific IM software to be bothered by the Internet’s equivalent of pollsters and salespeople.

But enough about how the poor logistics will cause this project to be scrapped. Let’s focus instead on how rocking the vote online is effective (or ineffective). First, I feel that more people would be more interested in listening online rather than over the phone about why they should vote. Phone calls have that marketing stigma, and youngsters may quickly correlate the annoyance of such marketing calls to rock-the-vote calls. Second, I think that online communication is more conducive to political discussion because it would give the average Joe the ability to collect and formulate his thoughts, then enter them in an IM. I feel that on a phone conversation the average Joe would not be able to compile his political thoughts quickly enough to respond, and would therefore hang up sooner to avoid any sort of embarrassment. One caveat, however: the demographics of online users would need to be considered if attempting to get an evenly distributed vote out. I feel that poorer communities would have less of a distribution of people online, and so phone-based efforts would still need to be carried out in such communities.

Hypertexts

2004-10-25T19:44:00.000-07:00

Michael Cripps’ site is great. We’ve discussed this many times in class, although we did spend one class day just excessively criticizing insignificant minor portions of work. I feel that Cripps was able to articulate the qualities of a great website that I could never organize as discrete ideas, but which I somehow intrinsically incorporated into any site I’ve created in the past four years. One argument that I find hard to implement is his concept of complete non-linearity. Traditionally, an informative website (such as a corporate website) is supposed to be non-linear with individual nodes that are individually complete. However, I find that an argumentative text, which is traditionally very linear, would be difficult to implement in a completely non-linear manner. Even Cripps’ site is somewhat linear. The topic groupings on the top of his page portray a sense of linear-ness in that it compels the reader to navigate left to right. I think that the best use of online hypertext is to leverage some of the extended usability features afforded by web browsers in making it easier for readers to follow your argument. For example, it is often the case where an author may mention an external topic about which the reader may know little about. In a paper-based text, the author would either have to start a new paragraph and describe this new topic, or point to an external source for further information. In online environments, the traditional approach is to link to another source that would contain information on the topic. Both of these, however, distract the reader from the topic. Specifically in the online case, if the user was to follow such an external link, he or she may become completely saturated in another site and forget about the original work. A better approach, in my opinion, would be to have a hovering textbox popup (basically an enhanced tooltip) when the user hovers over the unfamiliar topic that provides a concise description of the topic and of what the external source would provide. It is features like these that add real value to hypertexts.

Enough Ragging on PowerPoint

2004-10-18T09:02:00.000-07:00

There has recently been much debate on the evils of PowerPoint -- at least in the scope of this class. In fact, most of the articles listed for this blog entry attack the software. While the respective authors do make some specific valid points against PowerPoint , they unfortunately overlook the larger good provided by this ubiquitous software application.

To correctly evaluate the goods or evils of PowerPoint, the larger issue of the appropriateness of visual aids in presentations needs to be assessed. From the perspective of an audience member, I find that visual aids increase the effectiveness of information-heavy presentations. Visual aids help audience members to process information. Consider the most common form of a presentation for a student – the lecture. Professors do not deliver their lectures solely in audible form. Most professors utilize overhead slides, writings on the board, or (you guessed it) PowerPoint slides. For example, if my Math 53 professor didn’t work out problems on the board, I wouldn’t learn how to apply the theorems and techniques we have learned in class. Also, If he didn’t explain these theorems visually, they wouldn’t be reinforced in my head. PowerPoint delivers a similar same effect. My accounting professor goes through his entire lecture on PowerPoint. He elaborates at length about the points made in each slide, and students refer to the content of the slides to reinforce the content.

With that said, it is also important to evaluate PowerPoint’s role and effectiveness as a visual aid. The key quality of PowerPoint is its ease of use in developing a slide presentation. The software wouldn’t have taken off this explosively if it had been difficult for presenters to use. Creating a poster board containing a comparable amount of information would require far more time and resources. Also, a PowerPoint presentation provides the audience with an easy-to-follow, structured, and linear format for a presentation.

While I can understand some of the criticisms PowerPoint has received, they are a result of the shortcomings of PowerPoint and are not a reflection of some type of inherent evil. Hopefully these flaws can be addressed in future versions of the software.

Possible Research Project Topics

2004-10-03T20:11:00.000-07:00

There are too many topics related to technology and digital cultures that I am interested in. I've had a tough time filtering through all of them, especially options like e-voting, open source software, and VoIP (voice-over-IP).

The most difficult part about considering each option was figuring out exactly what to argue about the topic...

e-voting: Could the process be associated with too many security vulnerabilities? Can we develop a system that can ensure the necessary security required for voting? What approach would we need to take (e.g. would it have to be open source)?
Here is a blog dedicated to e-voting. I am trying to find a very comprehensive article about e-voting that I recently read.

open source software: Does it lead to better quality software? Is it conducive to security exploits?
Here is an article by Eric S. Raymond, THE open source pioneer, about the economics of open source software.

VoIP: Will it replace traditional phone networks? Is there any evidence supporting this theory? How are the major telephone companies responding to this technology? Is it too late for them to embrace it? Is Skype tightening its grip on the market?
Here is an article about how AT&T is taking measures to prevent being left out of the VoIP market.

I'm leaning towards VoIP because it has recently become a major technological development and my papery will involve a lot of business-related research, which is something I enjoy.