Review+Nate


 * PRESENTER___Nate__ **
 * REVIEWER __Ross____ **
 * 1. Did the presentation clearly describe the aims of the research – empirical, conceptual, methodological and practical? **
 * It was all there…sounds like the conceptual framework is still developing, though? **
 * 2. Did the presentation provide an overview of what we already know about the research subject, and then explain how the proposed research will create new knowledge? **
 * Ahh, Panics!...It’s not really a panic… **
 * 3. Did the presentation provide a robust sense of ****// how //**** the research will be carried out, and of the type of data that will be collected? **
 * Yes **
 * 4. Did the research plan presented seem credible and feasible? **
 * Yep, access…material…relevant experience…it’s all there **
 * 5. Did the presentation provide a tangible sense of the book and other outcomes of the research? **
 * No, but we can imply that it will be pretty awesome. **
 * 6. Did the presentation persuade you that the proposed research is important, in this historical moment in particular? **
 * Yes, I think bursting fear bubbles is always important…it is often used to manipulate people and/or provide an access point for powerful interests (like walling off the internet) **
 * 7. Was the speaking style clear, engaging and well timed? **
 * My favorite of the day, very entertaining. **
 * 8. Further comments and questions. **