{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.041700735895339326, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005723630417007359, 'mean_word_length': 5.915254237288136, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Radicals of presentation in persistent conversation

Going forward from N. Frye's (1969) "Anatomy of Criticism", we derive from genre literature the idea that radicals, i.e. root characteristics, of persistent conversation exist and can help define important aspects of such conversations. We identify from longitudinal interviews with members of a distributed, computer-supported learning environment, three dimensions of interactivity that revolve around speaker-audience relations. We propose three "radicals of presentation" in persistent conversation: (1) visibility (the means, methods and opportunities for presentation, addressing primarily speakers' concerns with the presentation of self); (2) relation (the tie between speaker and audience, and among audience co-participants, addressing the speaker's concerns with the range and identity of the audience, and audience members' concerns about relations with each other); and (3) co-presence (the temporal, virtual and/or physical co-presence of speaking and listening participants, addressing concerns about being with others at the same time and place, and giving and receiving immediate feedback). We conclude with implications for social and technical design.