Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
Gaming Community and Activity Research Report
The government organized a creative drawing competition. In order to ensure the rights and interests of the participants, it is stipulated that no plagiarism or secondary processing shall be allowed for the entries. One of the participants won the third place after being judged by the judging and voting by the players. After the list was announced, some players reported plagiarism of his work. According to my legal judgment, this work does not constitute plagiarism, but it is by no means original. Some of his works copied the work of a certain movie hero.
Now, 10% of forum users state that the official encourages plagiarism, and 20% think he does not constitute plagiarism. The official has decided to withdraw his qualifications for the second creation.
Topic: 1. In the face of this kind of public opinion issue, how should community members deal with it? Please list the handling plan, sequence and announcement content. 2. As a community member, how can you avoid it next time?
Please answer all 5 questions with your research and insights about the game industry.
NOTE:
1. Honkai 3 and Genshin are games developed by mihoyo, please do researchers before the event planning
2. KOL means Key opinion leaders which refers to influencers on youtube or tiktok
RUBRIC |
||||||
Excellent Quality 95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Literature Support 91-84 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met. |
|||
Average Score 50-85% |
40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided. |
83-76 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration. |
52-49 points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met. |
|||
Poor Quality 0-45% |
37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided. |
75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration. |
48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met |
|||
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow
Gaming Community and Activity Research Report |
Gaming Community and Activity Research Report