Difference between revisions of "Talk:CHE391L/S14/Ethics"
From SynBioCyc
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
*--[[User:Dst465|drewtack]] ([[User talk:Dst465|talk]]) 15:50, 21 April 2014 (CDT)'''First!!''' | *--[[User:Dst465|drewtack]] ([[User talk:Dst465|talk]]) 15:50, 21 April 2014 (CDT)'''First!!''' | ||
*--[[User:Dst465|drewtack]] ([[User talk:Dst465|talk]]) 15:50, 21 April 2014 (CDT)Also, the very first thing I notice is that there are no images, which essentially just makes this a giant blob of text. Also, you have a good variety of examples, but could you divide this up into different classes of ethical issues? | *--[[User:Dst465|drewtack]] ([[User talk:Dst465|talk]]) 15:50, 21 April 2014 (CDT)Also, the very first thing I notice is that there are no images, which essentially just makes this a giant blob of text. Also, you have a good variety of examples, but could you divide this up into different classes of ethical issues? | ||
| + | *--[[User:Mdf889|Mindy]] ([[User talk:Mdf889|talk]]) 12:45, 24 April 2014 (CDT)I agree with the figure comment- even though its ethics and it's mostly examples, figures that illustrate the examples or give more detail might help make it a bit more manageable to read. Also, is there anything that could be traced back to iGEM? Maybe they have a list of ethical standards they have to operate under, or perhaps there's been an issue in the past? Other than that, very thorough and understandable- good job. | ||
Revision as of 17:45, 24 April 2014
- --drewtack (talk) 15:50, 21 April 2014 (CDT)First!!
- --drewtack (talk) 15:50, 21 April 2014 (CDT)Also, the very first thing I notice is that there are no images, which essentially just makes this a giant blob of text. Also, you have a good variety of examples, but could you divide this up into different classes of ethical issues?
- --Mindy (talk) 12:45, 24 April 2014 (CDT)I agree with the figure comment- even though its ethics and it's mostly examples, figures that illustrate the examples or give more detail might help make it a bit more manageable to read. Also, is there anything that could be traced back to iGEM? Maybe they have a list of ethical standards they have to operate under, or perhaps there's been an issue in the past? Other than that, very thorough and understandable- good job.
