InterChange Transcript
Project II, Group 2, 2/2/95

To return to the Part Two page, click here.

Stephen Chim:
Hello there. Do you read me?

Dana Reichman:
I'm here too!

Eric Rosenfeld:
I'm here

Dana Reichman:
My paper is on email- is everyonne else's?

Stephen Chim:
How would you like to read my draft? I've it posted on infohighway@umich.edu. Or would you like me to post it here in Interchange?

Eric Rosenfeld:
My paper is on a pc diskette, I may not be able to get it translated for today

Eric Rosenfeld:
What would be easiest way to read papers?

Stephen Chim:
Eric, do you have a hard copy?

Dana Reichman:
I say we read each other's on email if possible. Eric, if you have a hard copy or something...

Eric Rosenfeld:
No, sorry. I guess I'll just help you guys with your papers today

Stephen Chim:
I'm currently reading Dana's paper on e-mail.

Eric Rosenfeld:
I'm logging on to Pine now

Stephen Chim:
Do Dana & Eric get my paper on infohighway@umich.edu?

Eric Rosenfeld:
I'm not there yet

Dana Reichman:
okay well my paper is not complete at all- it's only two pages. I'm not positive on how to elongate it although some backround on the Usenet would probably help. Also i have been observing my community for only 3 days I have your paper steve and will read it now.

Eric Rosenfeld:
I'm reading Steve's now

Wayne Butler:
Ok, the first thing you folks are going to need to do is figure out how you are going to share one another's texts.

You have several options:
1. You can exchange print outs if you have them.
2. You can read one another's drafts on e-mail.
3. You can exchange floppy diskettes and read the files in MS Word.
Once you have figured out how to exchange texts, take about 15 minutes or so to read one another's drafts.

Then,return to InterChange and begin a discussion of one another's drafts. Your goal is to collaboratively develop feedback for each writer that will help the writer expand, focus, structure or generally improve the draft.

Make sure you break up the time equally for each writer. You might structure your "conversation" around the following:

1. What works in the draft? What is your favorite part?
2. As a reader, what else would you like to know? Where within the draft could you as a reader use more information?
3. Given our on-line conversation the other day about "good writing," what would you say this draft needs to become a good peice of writing?

Also, the writers should feel free to ask questions. Often the writers' own questions about their drafts can help guide the feedback conversation.

Wayne Butler:
Remember folks, for this first round of feedback on first drafts, we want to focus on content, focus, structure, and organization rather than sentence level concerns such as clarity, style, and correctness.

Dana Reichman:
Steve, maybe you could combine your first few paragraphs about the nature of Usenet groups with your discription of sci.bio. What I am trying to say is that you could write a paragragh about how the Ussenet is the perfect forum for this topic. that may bring things together a little.

Stephen Chim:
Dana, the very first thing that you can "elongate" your paper is to add your posted message on scj and the e-mail response that you received. I think this first-hand personal experience is going to enrich your paper.

The next thing that you may want to do is to expand a little bit more on the uniqueness of USENET as compared to IRC and other type of CMC. You've pointed out that USENET is good for discussion but you haven't elaborate it further to the reader how and why it is good.

From what you've written, I am sure that you've found the appropriate group for Project II, since you seemed to enjoy being a part of the community. However, I wonder if you also experience the same difficult in quoting unedited articles from a USENET group, making it comprehensible to other readers who presumably know nothing about the background of the group's topic. For example, I know not too much about Jewish customs (except that I know there are so many rules to observe) and I have gotten some difficulty in understanding your excerpt from scj. I suggest that you can also elaborate a little bit there in Jewish customs so that a layman like me can also understand your point easily.

Stephen Chim:
Well, my paper is kind of too tedious and yet not to the point. As I said, I am not writing what I really want. I can give no good job under immense time pressure. You are probably frowning your eyes upon my tedious essay, aren't you?

Stephen Chim:
I am very interested to know what do you think of the excerpts in my DRAFT?

Eric Rosenfeld:
Steve-
I had trouble in some spots distinguishing what were your words and what were transcripts from USENET. Also, I think there are some paragraphs, especially at the beginning that can be combined. Maybe instead of ending the paper where you are, you should include transcripts from the flame wars you are talking about.

Dana Reichman:
steve thanks alot you have good ideas- I think it is kind of hard to write a good paper around so many quotations from postings. But i want to use the postings because they make the paper interesting and are the easiest way to get my point across. I AM NOT FROWNING ON YOUR ESSAY!!!! it is good. we both need alot of work!

Dana Reichman:
Like i said, i think the use of postings strengthens the paper but we both have long strings of them and i am not sure if that is really ok as far as good writing for a paper. steve, i think your postings are helpful though

Stephen Chim:
Dana & Eric, would you like to talk more on how to quote interesting excerpts in a way that is more comprehensible to the readers? I really want to include the flame war but I don't really know how I should do it. Should I quote the whole thing? Or should I edit and summaries the crude articles?

Becky Rickly:
Steve, you know, you might include excerpts, then an appendix w/ the whole thing if you think it's too long.

Dana Reichman:
I think editing would be good especially since there are over 20 postings. Perhaps you could just give some examples of the way things were going and then kind of narrate what happened instead of quoting it all. but adding some parts of the postings will definately strengthen your description of the flame war.

Eric Rosenfeld:
Dana-
I think the easiest way to elongate your paper would be to include more excerpts from USENET.

Stephen Chim:
Becky, thanx for your suggestion. :)

Dana Reichman:
Also, you might want to cut out the headings/ addresses from each posting Steve. It isn't really necessary in the paper and I think it might make things easier to understand. Just a thought.

Dana Reichman:
Eric- what community did you join?

Eric Rosenfeld:
Steve-
I agree with Dana. It may be too much to include all 20 messages, but you should include some. The ones you don't include you could summarize to make the war easier to follow

Stephen Chim:
Another question on what I've written: Is the contents of the exerpt comprehensible?

Dana Reichman:
steve- do you mean to the layperson?

Eric Rosenfeld:
Dana-
I joined the mailgroup for the band Phish, and also have also joined USENET group on the same topic.

Dana Reichman:
eric- that should be interesting, i hope there is a lot of traffic. that has made my group easier to analyze.

Stephen Chim:
I should definitely do something on formatting so that the reader can distinguish the exerpt from my essay.

Stephen Chim:
Dana- Yes, I mean to the layperson.

Becky Rickly:
Steve, I think it's interesting that you call the uninitiated a "layperson".....gives this electronic stuff religious overtones!

Dana Reichman:
Steve- well i do not understand every process they are talking about but i don't htink that really matters. It is clear from your choic of postings the type of dialogue that is going on and I think that is the real point of the paper. I don't think it is necessary, in your paper at least, to explain all the bio since the it is really about the community.

Eric Rosenfeld:
Dana-
Since joining the mailgroup a couple of months ago I've gotten something like 500 messages, so I have plenty to write about. It gets a little annoying reading all of them though. I think these people are a little too into Phish. I think they're a great band, but it seems like these people are taking a band a little too seriously than they should. My paper talks about this a lot. By next class I should have a copy of it posted.

Dana Reichman:
I am not familiar with the use of "layperson" in a religious context.

Dana Reichman:
Eric- wow i can't believe there is that much to talk about! It should make for an interesting community though! It sounds like an cool paper to me....

Stephen Chim:
Dana & Eric: Where can I find the list of mailgroups that I can join? How can I join it? Just by e-mail? I'm interested in joining one of them, though I have to put up with the heavy traffic

Dana Reichman:
Before time runs out I want to say this was very helpful - thanks guys!

I do not know how to join a mailgroup but i think there is a link on our homepage to "how to find an interesting mailing list"

Stephen Chim:
Dana & Eric - thanx for your suggestions too! I will try to browse around the home-page more thoroughly when I have the time.

To return to the Part Two page, click here.

Contact wbutler@umich
with comments or questions.

Modified: 3/4/95