Wiki
User is currently banned until further notice.
I mean, |
Reply 21 of 66 (Originally posted on: 12-28-10 04:53:29 AM)
Edit Post
| Edit History
| Send PM
| Change Title
| Reply w/Quote
| Report Post
| Ignore
| Show All Posts
Quoted from james joyces trashcan:
Quote: Please save the nonsensical "English fencing" bullshit and tell me if you have a response for all of this. To say there is no argument presented is a load of bullshit and I would wish that you would have an actual response instead of dancing around saying I present no actual substance. Of course there is substance to my writing, you have yet to really address it
I haven't read it yet and I will, but I want to address this attitude: If you think writing well is "nonsensical" then I'm not sure what you're trying to do. If you think you're going to convince anyone of anything if the writing is sloppy and poor then I'm not sure what to tell you.
In other words: If you want to convince people of things you have to be willing to communicate in an effective manner.
I know you want feedback on the piece itself and I'll get to it when I have some time to devote to it.
PS: To clarify, what type of feedback are you actually looking for? Or do you just want me to say it's the best thing ever and I instantly agreed with everything you wrote? Because if that's the case then I can save myself a few hours.
Save yourself a few hours if you wish, I am not looking for immediate praise such as patting a dog on the head for retrieving a ball.
In all honesty the formatting could certainly be better but I take this negative attitude towards those who have clearly not read it and are just taking shots from the peanut gallery who provide no substance themselves. In other words, I do not believe a thinly veiled "I don't like you" is very good feedback, if you should actually call it feedback.
Quoted from dewey deciman:
Quote: I have received no feedback
No. You received feedback; it simply isn't the feedback you wanted. There's a difference.
It should go without saying that you should proofread/edit before submitting this to anyone anywhere, even INTL, if you want constructive criticism. I could go through this with a fine tooth comb and rip it to shreds grammatically, but I won't. And as a forenote, I did read the entire thing, top to bottom.
In terms of the content of the post, have you ever ridden in a car or bus with air brakes? If you hit the brakes too fast the automobile comes to a lurching stop instead of a smooth halt. That's what this "short couple of pages" is. A bus with air brakes. You're talking about health care and education, then fair trade, then back to health care and education, then taxes, then the relationship between poverty and crime rates. I get that you're arguing for socialism, but you are really all over the map and because of that this...article (I guess it is?) lacks definition and therefore does not maintain the reader's interest.
Quote: Leaving out a "thesis" sentence or paragraph is not a basis for dismissing the entire article I have written.
Teachers, professors and editors have all dismissed articles for this very reason. In persuasive writing, you will get nowhere fast if you lack an opening thesis. You're also lacking a closing statement, which would help tie all this together, but honestly, the main issue with this work is that it lacks focus. There is no cohesion and no flow; as ice said, it's choppy and just kind of messy. Perhaps collecting all your points on education, then your points on health care, followed by free trade etc. and explaining how each relates to the next as transitional paragraphs would help.
I have, I believe, excellent reading comprehension skills, as do most of the people in this thread (and at INTL as a whole). However, I had to reread many of your paragraphs to understand your point, and I was left feeling slightly confused and a little lost from the point of the article. If you really want to get feedback about your argument, you need to present it in a readable way. This is not readable. If you can fix the problems with flow and focus your overall argument, the article will benefit.
Thank you for the constructive comments on the actual flow of the writing; I agree it simply could be better. I have originally broken down my subjects into three one pagers but when combined together it doesn't flow very correctly. Taken as a single page at a time they flow much more correctly. I had originally written this for a blog one page at a time. Reading back on this criticism I can see why it appears to have no flow. Taken one page at a time it has a certain flow but all three pages lumped together provides for a potentially confusing read. In the context of one page at a time, the writing makes much more sense.
Not certain I would call it an "article" rather than a piece for a blog, just my thoughts on the issues; there just happens to be three of them, but all lumped together. Three pages on three issues. I will see if I can edit the original post to make the writing more clear.
Quoted from too busy bangin': BAM
Immature quips such as this gives me the impression of you implying "I don't like you so I don't like your writing." I am not sure your comments can be considered much more than that. Now I will give you that others have said the writing could be considered rather confusing, but I did not really feel as though you actually wanted to give feedback on it instead of a thinly veiled "I remember you and I don't like you, so therefore I don't like your writing." I am not sure from your posts that this attitude from you is very hard to identify.
Understand why I have directed this attitude towards you; you direct the same towards me. I would prefer us "getting along," but it appears you simply have a negative attitude towards me and anything I write in general.
|