I don't get it…

For one of my classes I have written three papers. I really do not understand the grades I got on them given the amount of work I put into them.

On the first paper, I wrote about four drafts and revisions. I met with a writing tutor to get even more feedback and ideas to make it better. After I had most of it written, I even sent it to my professor to revise and give me even more feedback. I handed in the paper and when I got it back I got a C+. I thought maybe this was just a fluke and the next one will be better.

On my second paper, I still wrote about three or four revisions. Again I met with a writing tutor as well. This one I did not email to my professor prior to handing it in. I felt pretty good about my writing for this paper. I have been writing consistently in my other English class and had been doing pretty well. When I got my paper back, I got a C. I actually went down in grade.

My final paper I put off till the very last minute. I was in the library the night before it was due typing it. I only spent about an hour and a half on the first draft. I barely made any revisions to it, and thought the paper was total crap. I did not write more than one draft, I did not get tutored on it, and I did not send it to my professor before handing it in, nothing. I handed it in hoping to at least get a passing grade on the paper. Much to my surprise, when I got back my paper, I got a B+. This is the best grade I have gotten in this class on a paper by ten points!

It seems like the grade I get on those papers is inversely proportionate to the amount of effort I put into them. It can’t be that all three of my grades were flukes, could it? Maybe for the first two papers I should have merely spark noted the books and done them the day before they were due.

The House of Get Me Out of Here!

Edgar Allen Poe was never known for his cheerful stories with happy endings. His short story "The Fall of the House of Usher" is no exception. If I could change anything within the story instead of just reading it, there are a few things I would change.

The narrator does not ask enough questions! If I were the narrator I would ask about the scenery around the house. I find it a little strange that everything is either dead or dying and how even the lake is a murky color. The weather also aids this strangeness. Why does it have to be bad weather all the time? These are important things that should serve as red flags in the narrators mind. But no, he just brushes them off like they are a coincidence.

I would also liked to have made sure that Madeline was really dead. A corpse should not have rosy cheeks for very long after death. This kind of thing should be a sign as in ‘Hey maybe I should wait a few days and see if she is really alive’. If I was ever burying someone, the last thing I would want to do is burry someone who is alive. That is basically the primary job of the person who is burying them; to make sure they are actually dead.

If I was a part of the story, I feel I could help turn the Usher’s luck around. If Madeline were not buried alive, perhaps Roderick would not have gone into such a deep depression. The house itself may not also get so mad at the inhabitants. Even though I feel I would make the story a better, happier place, I would not want to be anywhere near it. The depressing nature of the weather and scenery is just not my style.

Linden Lab, You Fail at Advertising

Second Life is not yet a successful communications technology. There are many flaws, but I feel the biggest flaw it has is its current reputation. Before I knew I was going to have to use Second Life in this class I had seen it in a few different places. Both of which were on different television shows.

The first place I saw it was in an episode of CSI. The writers of CSI made it seem like some cool type of technology, but the role it had was in a slightly lesser light. The basis of the episode was that a serial killer was hunting down her different targets through Second Life. She then stalked them, and found their profile for personal information. This is how she found them in real life, and how she ended up killing her targets. Any game that you could be stalked through and killed would be unappealing, no matter how cool it looks.

The other place I saw Second Life was on an episode of The Office. One of the characters, Dwight, explains Second Life as “not a game. It is a multi-user virtual environment. It doesn’t have points or scores. It doesn’t have winners or losers.” To which the character Jim responds “Oh it has losers.” Later in the episode, Dwight creates a a game called Second Second Life within Second Life. This is for people who while playing their avatars, want to play avatars. This representation makes Second Life look like a dorky game that only losers play.

Just recently I was talking to one of my friends across the hall. I was talking about how we use Second Life in class to help us with our writing. My friend said something along the lines of “isn’t that one of those games that 30 year old losers play in their mom’s basement?” It is this image that is hindering Second Life’s advancement in the communication technology front. To someone who doesn’t know anything about Second Life, he had the “creepy” vibe. Linden Lab needs to fix this, and use their money to better promote Second Life, not as a serial killers paradise or loser hot spot.

Alpha Test

After my visit to Heritage Key, I have a lot of thoughts. First off, I like the innovation with the Valley of the Kings, and how it is an open sim client. I don’t know much about what that really means, but from what I’ve heard, it makes it better than other online worlds, because they are all able to work with each other.

Even though I like the idea, the world itself still needs much more work. Everything so far is very gray. I was flying and took this picture of the surrounding. The setting is going to be the first thing people see when they go to the valley, therefore it needs to be impressive. I understand that I am apart of an Alpha Test, but most of these issues need to be fixed.

It was very hard to navigate from place to place. There needs to be more of a mini-map. The one mini-map that they do have only tells what direction you are facing. It needs to have features showing where exhibits are, and more importantly where teleports are. It was very hard for me to get back and forth from the valley to the initial visiting center.

Many of the other problems I encountered were more glitches than problems. As you can see in this picture (above), it looks like I am falling, except I was never flying. I was walking down the path to the tomb of King Tut, and then I was falling. I kept falling, but was not actually going anywhere. Another glitch was the painting on the wall. At one angle, the picture flattens out (below). I don’t really understand how this happens or why it does, or even it is a problem at all. It may be to just make your avatar more visible.

Overall this proved to be an Alpha Test. This has not even gone into Beta and these flaws prove it. It is still being build and things are changing every week. It is a work in progress, but it is all in the right direction. I am anxious to see the final product and how it will all work together with other open sim clients.