I am arguing that procedural authorship is both a method of controlling and reining in the complexities of the hospitable network and also a method by which we might act, argue, persuade, identify, and communicate in such networks
Procedural authorship seems to almost be synonymous to rhetoric, but is it? I can't quite tell.
difficult to know whether the change in the script was truly more persuasive for women
This presents another huge factor in rhetoric - audience. If a rhetor tries hard to persuade a co-ed audience, success will vary depending on what gender each person is. Then how can you craft a message that is equally persuasive for both when the very essence of the message is more persuasive for one gender over the other?
It is also an indication that citizens and digital rhetors should be aiming to be, in Annette Vee’s terms, “procedurate,” cultivating tools for composing and understanding computational procedures
Are citizens and digital rhetors the ONLY ones who should be making the shift towards computational procedures? I would argue that in this day and age, being fluent in computational procedures with a rhetorical background would be much more beneficial for users and receivers of rhetoric.
procedural rhetoric will necessarily undercut and contradict the dominant message of a political campaign. Procedural arguments involve explicit statements (“If X, then do Y”), but this does not mean that the arguments themselves are explicit
Do arguments absolutely have to be explicit? Sometimes I feel as though arguments that are implicit or indirect can play mind games on he who receives it, which jumbles his mind and looks like he doesn't know what he's doing. This seems like a malicious type of rhetoric, but the text seems to be saying that it's not a good thing, especially in political campaigns.
procedural arguments can make complex and sometimes contradictory arguments
An obvious flaw of procedural arguments. Contradictory arguments have no place anywhere.
produced by actors in electoral contexts as artifacts manifesting political strategies and actions
I wonder if the word "actors" here refers to someone who acts upon something, or someone who is just acting like he/she is doing something but really isn't. There's a big difference between the two, especially in the context of political strategies and actions.
The essence of campaigning is persuading
This single, short sentence summarizes how this reading is relatable to the scope of this class. If the very essence of something is persuading, then it is more than welcome into a class centered on the discussion of rhetoric and how it permeates into modern society's affairs.
one that can be used to study “any medium—computational or not—that accomplishes its inscription via processes
This reminds me of our discussion on mediums from the Vygotsky reading - mediums really are important and what's better is that this sentence mentions computational mediums, which directly relates to the scope of the course (in particular, the fact that it deals with technology and the internet).
complex power dynamics of networks
This very loosely relates to what we previously read about how rhetoric and all of its components is far from simple. An example that comes to mind is when Roundtree says that language cannot be stripped down simply into syntax, grammar, etc. It is more complicated than that, just like how the complex power dynamics of networks add complexity to the whole issue.
Obama’s campaign team included paid and volunteer workers, and all involved authored sets of procedures to make arguments
I thought everyone was paid! This is interesting because I wonder if there was a significant difference in the effort exerted/success achieved between those who were paid and those who were not. Which begs the question, can one's practice/use of rhetoric be influenced by external factors such as money/motivation? Or is rhetoric more natural than that?
ethical predicament of hospitality
I wonder if this is something that is exclusive to political campaigns or if it can be applied to any rhetorical situation.