Week 6: Blog & Twitter Update
- jrebored
- May 5, 2022
- 2 min read
1. Twitter Summary:
I choose to create this tweet because I had read an article about how lobsters, octopus, and crabs were now recognized as sentient beings by the U.K government. I tweeted this as a response to those findings because if companies are aimlessly killing these creatures then this Simpson skit must be an appropriate response on behalf of the lobsters to what they would to do to humans that are trying to kill them. Plus I thought it was pretty funny :).
Click the link to see the full animation:
Some of the most interesting accounts that I followed this week on Twitter were @CrustaceanSoci and @crab_welfare. Some of the most interesting tweets that I saw was about sharks and lobsters. The one about sharks was presented by @pallavi_rajeev where he shared an infographic about how many friends sharks can have. I thought it was really cool to find out that they can have between 7 - 17 best friends. An interesting tweet from my own studies that I also ended up retweeting was about an article about how the population of young lobsters is declining due to global warming. Prior to reading this I only thought the warming was affecting the adult lobsters so it was interesting to find out that all lobsters ages are being affected in certain areas where the waters are warming. Some of the most affective hashtags that I used was simply #lobsterscience because there is not a lot of information on twitter on lobsters by using more specific topics associated with lobsters. Because I could not find much I also looked up #agonistic to help in research for lobster behavior.
2. AB Peer Review Summary:.
For the AB Peer Review Summary, I commented on Tony Pau's page. His Big 3 was about ants consciousness and emotions. In my response, I mentioned how one of his articles was probably not a research article based on the fact that it wasn't published in a scholarly journal. I also mentioned how his annotations needed to give more detail about the research studies that he is talking about (methods, results ect.) Instead of only talking about the authors of the studies. I also mentioned how his webpage could use some color, background pictures, and from face value the pages didn't look very clear. What I think he did really well was that he annotated the AB page to tell that it was research for his writing. I also liked that he made the author's names from the research sources big and bold and it was easy to differentiate each article from each other. This was something that I could definitely implement in for my website. In summary, I think he should just add more details to his work and website, add some creativity to his website, and then it's all good.
Comments