(1) Group Number and Group Name of Evaluators

Our group name is Broken Beakers and we are group 16.

(2) Group Number and Group Name of Evaluees
     
We evaluated group 23 and their group name is DNN


Visual appeal  7

Your sites were mostly black and white sites and not very eye catching.

Content  10

WWW Suitability  10
  
Relevance to 210  9

Personal Gain  10

Total from Peers  46 

Comments:  Several of the sites did not come in at all.  And the sites
were not that appealing.  Good job!!!! 

(1)	17, Catalytic Cretins
(2)	23, Magnificant DANAN
(3)	Visual appeal of site: 8
(4) 	Content of site: 9
(5)	WWW suitability: 8
(6)	Relevance to chem 210: 7
(7)	Personal gain: 8

Comments:  Good graphics but not very chemistry related, focused too
much on side effects, but it was interesting and we learned something
new.

(1)  18, Six String

(2)  23, Magnificant DANAN

(3)  Visual Appeal of Site:  7 Points
The Lead Acetate picture was bright, but most links didn't have much
visual appeal.

(4)  Content of Site:  7 Points
The content didn't go enough into depth.

(5)  WWW Suitablilty:  8 Points
There was no extraordinary information in this project that
couldn't be found in a book.

(6)  Relevance to Chem 210:  7 Points
The information available was not very relavant; however, some of the
links were not available.

(7)  Personal Gain:  8 Points
This was a very applicable topic.  A few girls in our group were
interested, because they dye their hair.  Thanks for the information!!

1) Group 19
        Brandon Larkin
        Mike Snyder
        Richard Aldenderfer
        Jason Effmann
        Raina Thomas
        Christie Hampton

2) Group 23
	Perry, Darren
        Mapp, Nikita
        White, Nicole

3) Visual Appeal of Site:  7 points
Good picture of molecule, but other than a few other small pictures of
people and boxes of hair dye, not really a whole lot of multimedia.

4) Content of site:  10 points
A lot of good, informative material.  Your group presented the practical
as well as the chemical side of the topic well.

5) WWW Suitablity:  6 points
Three sites did not work.  This probably led us to evaluate less than your
finished product.  One site was also too technical and did not present any
usable information.  That link belonged in a highly technical chemical
magazine, not on the web.

6) Relevance to Chem 210:  9 points
Overall a good job. Presented formulas and models to tie everything in.
Would have liked to see the site about chemical processes.

7) Personal gain:  10 points
A good site.  Good balance of chemical and practical information on a
topic that concerns many.

Note:  There seemed to be a problem at the top of the site.  It looks like
Group 24's introduction replaced yours.

1.  Group 20 - psyched
2.  Group 23 DANAN
3.  Visual appeal - score 7
First two sites lacked appeal.  Third was excellent.
4.  Content - score 8
Satisfactory.
5.  Suitability - score 9
Nice compilation of multiple sources.
6.  Relevance - score 5
Not very relevant.  Was not tied into organic chemistry.
7.  Gain - score 9
Total = 37