PLN Post #6: "The Presentation"

All of the presentations I saw for the action project were really good, but the one that intrigued me the most was Anthony Loagn's. Although he didn't put much into his presentation visuals and speech, he was really able to grab the audience's attention, by talking about a topic that they can relate to, including me. Through all of his jokes, facts, and convincing, the audience was with him the whole way, and they really understood what he was talking about, because they have the same experiences his topic was talking about. All speeches aren't necessarily rated based on the oral presentation, but by the way it can reach out to people, effect them with what they are saying, and convincing them to make a difference. That's what these speeches are for, and that is why they are a part of a position organization/group. Speeches are made in mind to reach out to people, and to tell them what you are really trying to say, and I saw that in Anthony's presentation about violent video games.

PLN Post #5: "Taking Sides"

While looking more into the concept of Social Networking, I have really come to a dead end when making a decision whether it's a good or a bad thing. Are all the risks of the internet really worth the value of the websites themselves? Should people really put their security at risk for posting pictures up on their wall. Like I said in my previous post, there are many pros and cons to Social Networking, so... the decision? The websites, MySpace, Glogster, FormSpring, and especially Facebook, have some really great qualities about them. What do they do for you? They allow you to be SOCIAL. That is the whole point of social networking sites, and that is what causes the hype for these websites. People want to be with their friends, even when they aren't with them. And that's the reason for the new fame of these websites. So what am I leaning towards? I think I want to see the social networking sites take off, and as long as you maintain your privacy, it could become a great thing!

Matt

PLN Post #4: "Social Networking Websites - A Good Thing?"

Regarding social networking, I have heard some pretty positive and negative things whether this new online phenomenon is particularly a good or a bad thing. So I started researching how other people thought about social networking sites like, Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and etc. I came across this article called, "Social Networking: Good Thing or a Bad Thing?" by John Michael Jayme, and he had some pretty controversial stuff. He didn't really come to a conclusion in the end, but he did come up with some good points in his article. Jayme says positive things about Facebook, like it's a daily necessity to share your thoughts, pictures, and other things with all of your friends. But then he talked about the problem of privacy, and that there are too many Facebook stalkers that might be ruining the social concept of Facebook. So we come to the question again, is social networking websites a good thing? Unfortunately, I'm going to have to end the same way Jayme did with an undecided opinion, because it really depends on the user itself. If the Facebook user takes extra precautions stay private, and wants to share his/her thoughts on the internet, than Facebook really might be a good thing for that person. But wrapping up my thoughts, Facebook and other social networking sites don't really lean toward a good or a bad side, but only has pros and cons that the person deciding will have to layout on his/her own, what they want from the internet.

Thanks for reading!
Matt

Wish to see the article? Link available in Resources page!

**Revisied** PLN Post 3: "The Most Dangerous Blog Post"

If you want to see a highlighted version of this text, go to the "Projects" page, and under "Short Story Unit" will be,"Revised version of: PLN Post 3: "The Most Dangerous Blog Post - With Highlights".

In the short story, "The Most Dangerous Game" by Richard Connell, the author had a lot of hints toward how he feels about hunting and about 'the hunt.' While Rainsford was on the island talking to the general, I think Connell expressed his tone through Rainsford like it was Connell in his shoes. 

"’Hunting? Great Guns, General Zaroff, what you speak of is murder.’

 The general laughed with entire good nature. He regarded Rainsford quizzically. ‘I refuse to believe that so modern and civilized a young man as you seem to be harbors romantic ideas about the value of human life. Surely your experiences in the war--’

 ‘Did not make me condone cold-blooded murder,’ finished Rainsford stiffly.

 Laughter shook the general. ‘How extraordinarily droll you are!’ he said. ‘One does not expect nowadays to find a young man of the educated class, even in America, with such a naive, and, if I may say so, mid-Victorian point of view. It's like finding a snuffbox in a limousine. Ah, well, doubtless you had Puritan ancestors. So many Americans appear to have had. I'll wager you'll forget your notions when you go hunting with me. You've a genuine new thrill in store for you, Mr. Rainsford.’

 ‘Thank you, I'm a hunter, not a murderer.’”

In that paragraph, Connell says that General Zaroff was trying to play with him, but I think he also suggests how cruel the general is being. Hunting for his entertainment, for sport. "Your strength and stamina against mine. Outdoor chess!" The general says this, but doesn't think about how evil he has really become. Like in one of my previous  blogs, I showed a chart about what is good, bad, and evil (on resources page), and I think the general is evil. He is doing a bad thing with a bad intention. He grew up hunting without learning the facts. And I think that's what Connell is trying to express through the story. Never do anything immoral without learning the consequence.

So that kind of sums up what I think Connells thoughts are about this short story and what his moral kind of represents. Thanks for reading!

- Matt

Also, for information about this short story, please check out the "Resources" page for info about everything I'm talking about. Thanks!

PLN Post 3: "The Most Dangerous Blog Post"

I think that in the short story, "The Most Dangerous Game" by Richard Connell, the author had a lot of hints toward how he feels about hunting and about 'the hunt.' While Rainsford was on the island talking to the general, I think Connell expressed his tone through Richmond like he was his puppet. That's how authors usually are, they would express just what they would do in their character, and I think Connell kind of did that with Rainsford.

"Hunting? Great Guns, General Zaroff, what you speak of is murder!" said Rainsford as the general smiled grimly. I think that's when the author was best expressed through Rainsford, when the general talks about hunting humans, and what he thought was right and wrong about hunting when it comes down to this.

In class today, we had some questions based on some of the subjects of this short story. Like for example, "What makes a good hunter?" and "Can you be cunning without intelligence?". But one of them kind of reflects off of what Connell is talking about, which is, "Is hunting morally right?". Connell kind of states this in the tone of the story when Rainsford finally knows what it's like to the the prey in some situations, to not always be on top, and for an animal that doesn't even know it's being hunted or have reason, it might not even be moral if it's for entertainment and pride.

So that kind of sums up what I think Connells thoughts are about this short story and what his moral kind of represents. Thanks for reading, this one was a little shorter than may last couple but thanks for reading anyway!

- Matt

Also, for information about this short story, please check out the "Resources" page for info about everything I'm talking about. Thanks!