This part isn't clear to me; I felt a little confused.

Two questions to help clarify the meaning (briefly) :

1. What sorts of choices?
2. How are they progressing?

If, by adding one or two words (or very short phrases), you can specify those two things (or both in the same shot), I think that would improve the readability for me dramatically.

consider adding a comma, like so:

"... wildlife, which is..."

1. Typo in "... more easily then..." change "then" to "than"

2. The parentheses in the first part "(especially the well-off)" doesn't match the next lack of parentheses around "poor populations" -- they're both referencing the same subject, and so the logical connection doesn't make sense to me.

TL;DR: The sentence should still make sense with parentheses removed.

Test: "Humans are able to stay afloat more easily then poor populations..."

Does it make sense? Not to my mind (unless you're ironically implying that poor populations are inhuman! maybe a sarcastic remark on those who seem to think/feel that way?).

Consider changing this to: "Well-off populations of humans are able to stay afloat more easily than poor populations..."

... or something else that leaves the connections consistent.

I would love a source article (or video) linked here, for me to read/watch -- sounds very amusing!!

I felt a little (slightly) uncomfortable reading this -- my brain evaluates it as a bit snarky or know-it-all-ish.

I think I would take it more sincerely, and feel more... deep appreciation, and gratitude & resonance for the message, if the word "hint" were removed (or it were otherwise rephrased or reframed).

While I (as a reader who likes to think of himself as intelligent and well-informed, as I think many of us do) know that recycling isn't the answer..., it's not clear to me whether the writer (and I read, think of, and receive this article as an anonymous / arbitrary speaker; not as you, Aaron, personally) knows & trust that me, his audience, knows this.

So having some sense the person directing their message at me /trusts/ me to some degree is really important for me to feel resonance with, and trust and confidence in, the article.

[this annotation is actually for the above green bar, stating: "The Oil Industry Is Certainly Willing to 'Win Ugly'"]

It was not clear to me that that green bar with text contained a link -- I only discovered it by accident, when I moused-over it, and noticed the cursor changed to a hand. I'm not sure how to make this more apparent -- maybe add "(article here: {URL})" or somesuch?

Two considerations:

1. This seems to me to break in style from your previously-established convention for links & citations (i.e., a consistency error); and
2. Should it be before or after the period? (unsure of what conventions say).

Consider changing from "(link") to some other options? Two that come to my mind (neither of them quite ideal) could be moving it to "support for climate change denial" and/or changing it to "(An excellent read/article/essay by Vice magazine delves into this [issue/topic] [, here].")

NB: I include optional phrasing in square brackets [ _ ].

nice -- appreciating the humor :D

source? not necessary, but (for my mind, at least) helps its appearance.

also re: Style: I have no idea what the style recommendations / conventions are: I see you started with a big icon of an open-quote. Q: Is it customary (e.g. in magazines, the New Yorker, etc.) to include an identically large-icon-sized close-quote?

re: The photo on the right: (Sorry, I couldn't figure out how to highlight the picture, so I'm adding the annotation here.)

I think it would be useful to add a caption (below the photo, in small / italic) describing what the photo is (e.g., "Dr. Frank Mitloehner, on his farm in...")

ouch.

Reading this at the beginning, I felt a bit like I was being hit over the head with a bludgeon (not in a good way).

My reaction: "He's attacking me! Why is he targeting me? I'm even on the same side as him!"

Since I'm assuming (hoping?) your target audience is folks who already are confident that human industrialization has caused climate change...

.... consider moving this caption to after the introductory paragraph (so I, reading this, know that you're not attacking nor targeting me as a reader -- but rather, I think your point is, talking about those other people who are part of the challenge that we (as readers, in this together) are facing).

Does that any sense?

Another possibility:

Consider adding a header before this paragraph, along the lines of: "The Psychology of Climate Change" [optionally add: "in the US / America," if you like]

That will give folks some heads-up as to where the next bit is coming from; prepares the audience a bit.

Consider changing to some variation of:

• "science degree" (or)
• "degree in..." (or) "PhD in..."
  • "... the sciences"
  • "... that field"
  • "... a related field"

... I think one of those may read a little better (to me at least) that way.

Consider adding a comma between these two words. (Run the whole sentence through a grammar-check to be sure -- I'm not certain.)

I love this. That's all. I just really, really like this transition and statement and reference to another (outside) source, and (even better) one that immediately sounds (to my brain) reputable & well-searched.

"The original question of .... was originally..." I just love this historical reference, going back & looking at where it came from.

Yay! More awesomeness. I love how you're doing this.

Keep the audience moving, not settling on / taking a position, going into the history & research, presenting multiple sides -- fantastic.

[see also thoughts in previous annotation on "both"]

I like the first part -- "I welcome you to join me in this exploration."

Reading the latter, it seems to me somewhat prescriptive (what I should do), which I think is less effective (doesn't meet my need for autonomy / self-determination).

One possibility, which (for me) would read very well and nicely, is to eliminate the rest of the sentence altogether (principle of "less is more").

Another possibility: I'm wondering how this can be rephrased or reframed, such that it is truly an unattached invitation, rather than (how it seems to me) a moral recommendation.

Consider removing the underline on "both." I think this may read better (and possibly be more influential) without it -- my sense is that with the underline, I receive it as more prescriptive (what one should do), whereas without, I imagine it would feel less prescriptive & more descriptive (making an observation, not recommending action). .... Side note: Dale Carnegie's research seems to indicate, "Let people think it's their idea" (when choosing an action or decision) is a more effective approach in 'conversion.'

My thoughts: This seems a little out-of-the-blue. Two points: One, the transition for me as a reader was (slightly) abrupt; and two, my inner skeptic says, "Really? You just suddenly woke up one day and realized this?" It begs the question of "How did this occur to you?", and leaves a little to be desired (for me at least). Some context, e.g. hearing friends/community talk about this, learning more, etc., may be of use for the reader here. I'm wondering whether telling a (brief) story or anecdote (maybe 1 to 3 paragraphs?) about how this occurred to you in the first place (or whether you'd thought about it for a while, etc.), may be worthwhile.

should be: 'said one of the'

• change 'on' to 'one'
• delete the first instance of 'the'

1) TYPO: 'it was to early to tell.': change the first instance of 'to' -> 'too'

It will then read: 'it was too early to tell.'

2) Given the close proximity of two instances of 'too' (the first being the last word in the speaker's quotation, the second being our now-corrected typo)... consider replacing one of those instances with some other equivalent.

The first instance would be easier, but less casual-sounding, to replace; options include:

• 'also'
• 'as well'

The second instance would be a bit trickier; options include:

• '{As of this writing | At press time}, that's still an open question.'
• ', it was yet unclear.'
• ', it was yet unclear what the outcome would be.'
• ', it wasn't yet clear.'

.... This said, my immediate thought is that 'it was too early to tell' is an open, receptive/neutral, and -- importantly -- potentially optimistic phrasing. I.e., "We don't know yet! The future could hold anything!"

That's a much more optimistic outlook, compared to terms like 'unclear' -- that seems murky and potentially doubtful to my mind.

So I like the way you phrased it initially.

• consider whether or not to lower-case the M in "Making." (I should probably ask an experienced copywriter or professional editor, actually... There is probably a "one right answer" in this instance, although I'm not certain.)

• Change it's to its (that is, remove the apostrophe)

The possessive form of "it" is an irregular form of possessive in lacking an apostrophe, probably to avoid confusion with the contraction of "it is."

(This is yet another grammar rule I memorized in public schools. :p)

Strictly speaking, semi-colons are only used to separate clauses which could, on their own (as they stand), each be a grammatically complete sentence. The test? [You'll notice that last remark wasn't a grammatically complete sentence, by the way.]

Replace the semi-colon with a period; see if it works.

Replace the semi-colon with a period. See if it works.

"A challenge" isn't a grammatically complete sentence. Of course, stylistic licenses are sometimes taken to defy the rule of "every clause between two periods must be a complete sentence."

In this case, though, I'd suggest:

• adding a repetition of "it is" after the semi-colon (to make it complete-sentence-worthy): 'It is a question; it is a challenge.', OR
• replacing the semi-colon and substituting a colon in its place. (This also has the advantage, in my mind, of making it a 'stronger' statement: throwing down a challenge.): 'It is a question: a challenge.', OR
• both: 'It is a question: it is a challenge.'

Either or both should work. (Personally, I like the second option best: 'It is a question: a challenge.' ) That said, if you prefer it the way it is for style, go for it. It just stuck out in my mind, but I am a fiend for proper (or obsessive) semi-colon usage.

insert a space between the comma and the open-quote.

NOTE: On the website (html version), the lack of a space is clearly visible.

(Although visually, in this pdf, it looks like there is a space -- but there actually isn't!! ... It's just how the pdf is rendering on my screen that gives the illusion of a space-character being present. If you try to highlight it, you'll notice there's no extra character between the comma and the quote-mark.)

typo: insert "of", as so: "instead of against"

change to "fueling" (one L).

• "fuelling": turns out, this is the UK / Commonwealth spelling (with two L's).
• "fueling": this is the US spelling (with one L). In the US, the word "fuel" -- regardless of any word-form it takes -- always has only one (1) "L."

side note: I am all in favour of using British or Commonwealth spelling! If so, then it should be consistent across the entire published work (but I didn't think that it was your intent to use British spelling here ;p).

Normally, I'd suggest hyphenating "world changing," but since you're using hyphens as the bullets in the list, it might appear a little awkward here if you chose:

-World-changing ideas

Given this, normally, I'd then also suggest substituting other bullet-types instead (to alleviate the issue of then using hyphens in the list items)... except that I happen to like how you've chosen hyphens (or en-dashes) as the bullets for this list.... They (hyphens) seem less obtrusive and more appropriate to me, somehow, compared to if you replaced them with asterisks or "standard" bullets (e.g. large black dots).

So I'm not sure what to suggest, or whether to leave this as is.

OK, all the other boxes at the bottom work great, e.g. 'CULTURE PAGE 2'.

Here, however... my brain immediately read this as "NEWS-PAGE" rather than "News. Comma (or colon). Page 2." I think this is because words like "newspaper" are common in our vocabulary. (Is "newspage" a common term?)

Options:

• insert a comma after 'NEWS' and/or
• change 'PAGE' to lower-case (but then be sure to do this for all boxes).

Personally, I like the first option at a minimum, and maybe or maybe not combined with the second option.

Consider replacing this with: 'Each volunteer seems to have had a different'

I'm concerned about shift in (temporal) tense here.

To me, the use of that tense seems to flow better with the temporal-tense of starting-in-recent-past and continuing-into-the-present. (I.e., that this movement is still occurring: in particular, that folks' reasons-cited are still active and are shaping their work and actions, rather than simply being in the past.... But it's your call, and a stylistic concern slightly more than a strictly grammatical one...)

See other notes that are tagged "en- and em-dashes" for explanation. This actually isn't such a big deal IMO, esp. if it's consistent throughout the entire publication. But if you wanted to know about it, it's there. Let's face it: Most folks reading this probably won't care a bit (or even know about) the distinction or rules. So, you can probably ignore anything that's labeled as such (tag: en- and em-dashes).

OK, two things: en-dashes and em-dashes, and spacing with regard to each.

The latter—em-dashes—are usually roughly double or triple the length of the former (an en-dash).

The usage is different for each. (Wikipedia has a great article on them.)

While I'm not entirely certain about the first instance ('invitation- it will not...')... whether there should be a space on both sides of it, or neither side, or okay the way it is (i.e., with no space before, but with a space after)... I am reasonably sure it should be an em-dash (the longer one).

In the second instance: I believe it should be an em-dash (the longer one, again). However, I'm uncertain whether—having replaced it —there should remain spaces on both sides. This may have something to do with whether or not there are two of them surrounding a clause (i.e., to replace a pair of parentheses), or whether it's being used to replace something more akin to a colon.

Side note: Occasionally, when typing on a standard keyboard, two adjacent hyphens or en-dashes (see also footnote*) will be used, like so: --

However, this is not a true substitution for an em-dash, like so: —

Research needed (on proper spacing in various cases of em-dash usage, primarily). Man, syntax is complicated!

( footnote:<br> not even hyphens and en-dashes themselves* are the same... but sometimes, given the limitations of a standard keyboard or plain-er text typing program, the same character will used synonymously for both... however, it's generally frowned upon in more formal publications, I believe.)

Another second-caps concern. Consider lower-casing Instruments

I realize this may have been wholly intentional on your part, because I can see a good reason for it in these list items.

Figuring out styles and conventions -- when one is at liberty to choose(!) -- can be really bloody difficult, at least for me.

My main concern is that -- in these four list items -- there are suddenly caps at the beginning of all the words...

... and that doesn't (seem to?) match the style/convention chosen in other cases.

Although the reasoning here makes sense to me, still, I'd suggest lower-casing all but the first word in each list-item (in order to match style of the rest of the list).

• In the case of "Folding Tables and Chairs": I'd suggest repeating the word "folding", so folks are sure to get the message:

"Folding tables and folding chairs" (hyphens optionally suggested)

Since you'll be removing the capitalizations, I can understand that the "folding" part might not be viewed as applying to "Chairs," so some redundancy of wording is probably called for.

Consider (not necessarily required??) either:

• adding a hyphen here, OR
• removing the hyphen from "blind-spots" in the second paragraph of this same article.

Note, the hyphen in the earlier case (second paragraph) may have been auto-inserted by the Adobe InDesign program...? I notice that the hyphen comes as the last character at the end of a line; "spots" is at the beginning of the next line (so that may have happened if you hit spacebar after "blind", perhaps a glitch).

My guess (quick research needed to confirm) is that probably both "blind-spots" and "blind spots" are correct.... It's mostly a question of choosing one or the other, and maintaining the convention (and compensating for software program shortcomings).

Lastly: I will note that there may, from a readability perspective, be an advantage in having the hyphen at the end of "blind-", when it is the last word on a line (and the word "spots" doesn't appear until the next line).... I think it helps the reader along.

delete the word "is"

Yet another concern about en-dashes, em-dashes, and the appropriate spacing for either (depending also on the purpose of their use).

Consider removing the period at the end of this list.

It's a stylistic or slight syntax concern: maintain the existing conventions already in place (no periods at the end of list-items). NB: Other editors might disagree with me in this instance.... IMO, it appears a little more awkward than if it were left out, but that's pretty subjective.

consider removing the word 'and'; it's not strictly necessary, depending on your exact meaning.

would you like folks, ideally, to bring ALL of the above (if they have all three items available to share)?

My concern is primarily a reader or "user-interface" note: Folks may be confused by the use of the '@' symbol. (I've seen people attempt to put them into website URLs where they shouldn't be.)

In addition, since top-level domains (e.g. '.news') are relatively new -- AND given the odd type-face / all-caps font, plus or minus other factors -- I'm concerned about the greenest 'joe schmoe' user reading this, and not realizing either that it's a website address, or at least where it starts and ends.

I may be over-simplifying it for the major of users; that said, you may wish to consider either or both of:

• removing the '@' symbol
• adding a colon

So it could look like any of:

• 'RSVP at:'
• 'RSVP by going to:' (again with a colon)
• 'Commit here:'

In the URL, also consider:

• prefixing http://

AND/OR:

• lower-casing at least the first T (in Tomorrow), OR changing the entire URL to a different font-type (although I'm unsure which to recommend, here)

change 'and' to 'an'

needs a period, AFTER the closing of the parenthesis, like so:

(or if you would be if you knew that at least 1000 people would be out there with you).

OK, all the other boxes at the bottom work great, e.g. 'CULTURE PAGE 2'.

Here, however... my brain immediately read this as "NEWS-PAGE" rather than "News. Comma (or colon). Page 2." I think this is because words like "newspaper" are common in our vocabulary. (Is "newspage" a common term?)

Options:

• insert a comma after 'NEWS' and/or
• change 'PAGE' to lower-case (but then be sure to do this for all boxes).

Personally, I like the first option at a minimum, and optionally combined with the second option.

change 'spontaneously' to:

• either 'spontaneous',
• or 'spontaneously organized' (with or without a hyphen should work)

consider replacing 'that were' with: 'which were'

consider revising:

• one possibility: 'to generate independent media, documenting and sharing everything online as rapidly and widely as possible.' (There are other ways of doing so -- I'm not sure what the best approach is, here....)

insert a hyphen: "24-hour"

(I'm relatively certain this is the most widely-accepted way of writing it; other interpretations are possible, but I think the hyphen applies here.)

change: move the period, so it's inside the quotation mark.

Placing commas and periods inside dialogue quotation marks is proper syntax/grammar in normal writing. .... It's improper syntax only in technical/computer writing. However, it's possible that -- stylistically -- this may have changed in recent years, as technical (and technology) writers have influenced mainstream writing somewhat.

change the comma to a period (or something other than a comma): 'at the warming hut. "We are taking ...'

change "Said" to lower-case "s"

consider changing to: park, and music

consider changing to:

Some of the volunteer food handlers had even dressed up in fancy clothes, seating groups of complete strangers together and waiting tables on them, as if

What was donated, the trays or the food (or both)?

If the food was donated, then consider this: homemade foods had been laid out, in a circular array of stainless steel warming trays, donated by a local catering service.

If the trays, then consider: homemade foods had been laid out in a circular array of stainless steel warming trays, which {were | had been} donated by a local catering service.

Given the slight shift here:

"The point is accepting the challenge. It’s about tackling an impossi-ble goal and pushing ourselves to get better at it."

.... I'd love to see the period replaced with a colon, because the flow of observations/evidence-statements being made has now shifted to a conclusion being stated.

Purely a judgment call; my personal opinion is that it would read better this way: "There is no right answer. Anyone can participate just by doing or cre-ating something, and then shar-ing what they learn. The right answer for one community might not be the right answer for another community. The point is accepting the challenge: It’s about tackling an impossi-ble goal and pushing ourselves to get better at it."

My understanding of strict grammar rules, with regard to writing numbers, is as follows:

• When writing a number less than ten, one spells the number (and refrains from writing the digits).
• When writing a number greater than 10, one writes the digits (e.g., 24).

(Side note: I don't recall what the rule is for the number ten itself!)

Anyway, that being said: My sense is that in journalistic writing (and in fiction, and in novels), one can take stylistic licenses; it's entirely up to you, based on what style, context and goals you have in mind.

If it were me, I'd spell it out (but it's your call): "but three is still pretty good."

update comparison-table: incl. proxy ("via.hypothes.is") & other tools (Chrome extension)