Peer Review Comments

Comments I left for my tablemates'...
For Jasmine:
Overall, your draft is pretty well written and there are only some things you might want to make changes to. In your introduction, you might want to declutter. There are unnecessary phrases that makes it somewhat hard to understand. Your first body paragraph is really well-written but you can add more CM to the second CD by describings its connection to the way people in the past use to speak. A small grammer mistake you have is that it is suppose to be "neither a friend nor a lover" not "nor a friend nor a lover."

For Max:
Your rough draft is pretty much done, but one of the major things I think you can fix is your grammar and formatting. It might be better if you used the "quote" button/choice/whatever so that your quote is actally block quoted. Another thing is that I thing you should take out the personal stuff. Ex: do you really have to include stuff like: "One was just saying that I have surface errors; grammar, punctuation, etc. The other one however was completely criticizes my piece. They said that my piece had an irrelevant quote, and did not make much sense. Now at first I was surprised, but after looking over it, they were kind of right. Though for this blog post, I decided to challenge them and rewrite it"?

For Kyle:
Between you rough draft and your previous book posts, there isn't much of a difference so my comment is pretty much whatever I said when I commented on your post: For one, I think the first thing you should do is to identify your book. There is more than one book to the Harry Potter series so the reader may not be able to immediately grasp whichever book your review is about. Another thing is that you do not really discuss the questions you picked in depth. You answer part of the question but it does not really seem as if you answered it. Your post is practically all concrete detail - maybe have more commentary. (p.s. for some reason, I can't comment on your rough draft blog...)