This was probably one of the more interesting parts of this article. This was a total admission of negligence on behalf of the university. It's great to see a faculty member step up and shoulder the load when someone voices their displeasure of being stuck 'between the cracks' of digital projects into mainstream press workflow.

These kinds of questions are the same as those brought up by McDaniel when he asks about the reliance on nuance about methodological conversations. Why would these conversations need to be so jargon laden? It's the purpose of the historian to be able to have these conversations at a higher level to hash out the minutia of detail in good history.

This is an interesting meta point about how an outsider to the humanities would view the craft. I too struggle with this in-fighting lifestyle to see the proverbial light at the end of the tunnel when producing any sort of work.

This fundamental opposition comes at the expense of having a second set of eyes see the value of what you hold in your hand as expressed in the McDaniel article.

These kinds of group sessions in class like this really are the example of what this first section preaches. As a late comer to class I've been able to find the value of this data by reading others' annotations and building my own learning.

This kind of ease of access and low bars to entry becomes the essence of why openness is more of a philosophical choice. To give everyone (with a device) the capability to take over your work is the fear and bane of a lot of historians existence. As bethany points out in the replies toward our OP (Sarah) points out the opportunity to find more scholarship happening. I think this can create a fallacy of completeness in the historical construction of a topic. Where everyone shares their work but the same narrative gets built; and the topic becomes bored.

This is an interesting commentary about how historical space is set up using descriptive orientating words. This helps paint a picture in the reader's mind about the environment; essentially recreating a historical reality. I got this idea from stuartconverse's comment (above) about how this was 'a nice place'.

Important info for later on in the course.

A sneaky important point...going to remember this.

Great..

This sounds pretty interesting but also very challenging...

This is the most exciting question for me. I'm interested to find out more about where this assault is occurring?