Email.

The Selfe article was an interesting read, as it dealt with the effects of consensus in a group as well as the role of pseudonyms on online collaboration.  The bulk of the article seemed to highlight the power struggles between men and women in face-to-face collaboration as well as online conversations.  While that matter does not seem to be of any importance in the four student emails, the matter itself is quite important and interesting nevertheless.

            The email from S was basically a long angry rant.  Aside from the distracting writing errors, the email itself was a long drawn-out declaration of how S had been wronged, and trying to defend their self.  It was like a personal journal entry.

            The email from A was somewhat shy and liberating to the writer apparently.  The writer seems to feel like the problems with the group are troubling, but not something that the writer should have to deal with to try to solve.  The use of the word “tolerance” says a lot about this writer.

            The email from W was just a long narrative of what happened.  The professor must have fallen asleep trying to read this!  It was funny to read W. speaking of having no time to waste, when this email was the longest out of the four.  W has good ideas, but this email is not effective in bringing those ideas out.  It was just a long play by play of the group’s troubles.

            The email from K was by far the better of the four.  It was short but informative.  The email was not a personal defense or rant about the toils of collaborating with the others.  K brings in good ideas, and presents questions to the professor in hopes of getting genuine help.

 

Email 1:

Morning Gordon!

 

Thank you for sending the images and memo draft!  I have put

four final images on the memo.  All we need to include are

our reflections, and I'll send it all in one form.

 

Happily awaiting your reflection,

 

Heidi Pak

 

Most of my emails this semester were short.  I thin this email was effective because it was brief but did not leave out any important information.  I believe I was clear, friendly, and overall effective.

 

Email 2:

Hey Sharon and Melanie,

 

I have just uploaded my letter on blogger as well.

As for a "schedule", I am not certain 100% as to how this

assignment is working.

Are we going to collaborate and submit a copy that is based

off all three of ours?

 

I think we should definitely try to turn in the copy (if

that is what it's supposed to be?) as quickly as possible.

 

Cheers,

Heidi Pak

 

This email was short as well.  I think I could have explained my confusion with the assignment and questions out a bit more thoroughly.  My email was also not decisive, but I would justify myself with the uncertainties with the project guidelines.

 

Email 3:

Krystal,

 

I read through your revisions, and liked how you got rid of

a lot of the filler.  I just changed a few words according

to Beth's suggestions.  I still feel like the memo needs

more technical information, but seeing that Beth hasn't

called it an issue, I think we're good on those details.

 

I think a shorter memo is key in this situation.

-       Heidi

This short email was effective I believe, because it was clear.  I presented what changes I made, and clarified as to the reasons why.