There are several things to notice about the exchange above. It’s respectful, with each person listening and accepting what the other person is saying. It’s collaborative, with each person contributing knowledge to the conversation. It’s grounded in design rationale and design judgement, focusing on why choices are made and why different choices were made, and how that might effect the success of the solution.
Reading the sample critique above really helped me understand what a "good" critique looks like, which is something I feel like is rarely focused on in other courses I have taken. I like the idea of critique as a conversation more than just a required Canvas comment. It's much easier to misunderstand ideas if you are not able to ask the designers any questions– I feel I have misunderstood other people's ideas and that my own ideas have been misunderstood when there is no communication. This has also shown me how I can improve my own critiques if I really engage with the idea I am critiquing and ask the designer questions about their idea.