ChrisL (Season 1 Runner Up)

Feedback & Final Score Breakdown:

Content: 25/30

You paid great attention to detail with regard to Rind I’s natural geographic features, atmosphere, and climate and I am delighted to see that you haven’t just listed the relevant details and information from the dataset. You have found a way to present information in a diligent manner without making it sound stale, which was what I liked about your answers to the first question. While your “Points of Contention” section presented is not only “fact-based” and makes an excellent attempt to balance the data with descriptive language, it was unclear which two man made landmarks were being featured in this entry. Perhaps one of them would be the “Hopeful Mountains,” but I didn’t feel that the location/landmark was made by living beings or humans as it felt like a natural geographic feature of the planet.

The answers to the second question in the “A Planet Born of Violence” section, were very clear and well organized. You managed to dive into the specifics behind each stage of the process of having a terrestrial planet gradually evolve its lifeforms into complex ones that live on land. You very clearly organized information into distinctly distinguishable time periods by presenting information pertaining to the time before the Ascalans arrived, the time after the first asteroid strike and the formation of underwater volcanoes and mass extinction events in the sea, the time period where bacteria emerged in the sea, and finally, the story of complex life developing on the land. I really enjoyed reading how you were able to talk about “recent surveys” to incorporate information in the dataset that was not part of the terrestrial planet. There is a logical progression of ideas in this section, which greatly engaged and captured my attention.

Though I did feel quite engaged in the section “From Landfall to First Contact,” I felt that there was some inconsistency in the way the third question was answered. One of the reasons why I felt that Shaylee Renault and the Landfall catastrophe felt more compelling than Jonah Camden and the humans’ interactions with the Ascalans during First Contact was because the way the former event was written was more consistent with the way the prior information was presented compared to the latter event. The Landfall event felt more like a documented event compared to First Contact where I felt the humans and Ascalans were having a back-and-forth conversation that should take place in a novel (it felt like fiction-fiction). In other words, I felt more connected to the Landfall because the way the information was presented (i.e., less dialogue) felt more like an entry from a historical textbook. In my understanding some historical (futuristic) accounts don’t usually record entire conversations and interactions exactly verbatim, which is why I felt that the First Contact was not as engaging and consistently structured/organized as the Landfall event. That said, the First Contact event felt more like a historical documentation towards the end of the section. I would say sometimes some dialogue may serve a good purpose in historical-like documents, but when overused in third-person historical entries it could feel like the result of some kind of fabrication or alluding to a conspiracy theory. Another reason why the Landfall felt more engaging was because I was always thinking about whether it was actually Shaylee Renault herself who sabotaged the event, but that’s my hunch.

Your answers to the fourth question are thorough and relevant to the themes of the issues and conflicts discussed in the Planet Profile. In the “Reactions Across the Colony” section, you were able to show how humans and the Ascalans are at “Cold War-like” odds at each other in a religious, economic, and technological sense. There is a sense of each species not wanting to be the one to start a war. I rarely consider how extraterrestrial life would think about human religions and it was interesting to consider exploring how we could consider adjusting our religious beliefs to tailor our needs for coexisting with extraterrestrials in the future (if we find any or if they find us). I also found it compelling to explore how extraterrestrials also value religion when we typically think of extraterrestrials as some kind of advanced species with far superiorly-advanced technology compared to ours. With regard to the economic sector, you have addressed very important issues that seem very relevant when two species struggle over resources like water and other vital materials that are essential for a stable civilization to function.

Application of Dataset: 17/20

In this submission, whenever part of the dataset is used, you always make great use of it by expanding on the details. The information from the dataset is never used on their own, which allows this submission to present a sense of familiarity of the planet. You also chose to only use information that is relevant for the purposes of the issues and themes you present in the magazine article. I really like the fact that you were able to tie-in the climate and temperature with the geographical locations of Hopeful Mountains from the low-resolution map. Your emphasis of bacteria and plants in your discussion of how complex life evolved to live on the planet was also a nice touch. I also liked that fact that you occasionally bring up the lack of oxygen and the toxicity of the air, which brought the people in the Planet Profile to life when it comes to the conflict between humans and the Ascalans.

For improvement, I would suggest finding ways to present the other missing information that you haven’t used even if you can’t expand on those details. For example, I suggest using details such as the planet’s physical and atmospheric composition (specificizing the percentages) in a brief introduction or in a table of some sort. Sometimes, you might consider relating missing information to some of the topics you bring up like the answer to the fourth question where you discuss the Rind I’s religious, economic, and technological sectors. If the missing information doesn’t fit there, maybe consider discussing other socioeconomic and cultural factors other than religion/economics/technology. While it would be optimal if you found a way to include these missing details, it is understandable why they weren’t utilized for the purposes of the submission.

Creative Format: 18/20

Most of the magazine-styled article was written closely to the way a magazine article is usually voiced in writing. However, some sections of the submission were quite dialogue-heavy, especially when reading the section on First Contact with the Ascalans.

Visual Appeal: 9/10

The positioning and formatting of the main text is consistent throughout the submission. By using two columns and justifying the text (i.e., using squared text indentation), the information appears professional and authoritative. I also liked your use of simple subheadings and the way you end each section with a large space of blank text in between them demonstrates good awareness of the way a magazine article can be designed. I also like how you highlight some quotes from the main text to emphasize the significance of the First Contact event with the Ascalans. Finally, the images are simple, but are detailed enough to be aesthetically pleasing – for instance, I like how the title’s font color is contrasted on the title page’s image. It was also great to see captions on the other images and the pie chart diagram. I recommend using more types of visuals to diversify your mode of communication from pages 11 to 16.

Realism: 10/10

Everything here is excellent!

Grammar, Spelling, Limited Jargon, and Readability: 10/10

There are no grammar and spelling issues and I could not find any instances of scientifically technical jargon being used. Everything was easy and read and understand but I would prefer if the submission’s length was shorter. However, since I haven’t specified a word limit, the score here is perfect!

TOTAL: 89/100