Rhetorical velocity focuses on when and how a piece is delivered to an audience. It is initially defined as “a strategic approach to composing for rhetorical delivery”. Later in the article, the author defines rhetorical velocity as “an understanding of how the speed at which information composed to be recomposed travels”. I think that to compose a piece of writing for recomposition means that when you are creating your piece, you have to be ready for your work to be changed or edited to fit many different settings. For example, an article you write could be put in a magazine, and they might add a picture you did not originally include. This is not a major reconfiguration of your work, but the magazine is trying to enhance your article to best fit their platform. On the other hand, something you say could be completely misinterpreted and you could be quoted as support for something that does not directly relate to your work. This would completely change the meaning of your work, and could be used to support something that you are very opposed to.
To encourage people to reconfigure my work to contribute positively to my campaign, I think it would be best to make my pieces easily implemented on other platforms. For example, my second campaign piece could be a flyer or something that is shared on social media. When it is printed out as a flyer, it will be harder for it people to reconfigure it because they cannot edit my work directly. If it is shared on social media, every time someone reposts it they can write their own comments about what they think, and every time something is added, the meaning will change slightly. I think that in order for a piece to be successful online, it has to be composed in a way that is easily shared and everyone can recompose the message themselves.
I agree that writing with recomposition in mind means that “you have to be ready for your work to be changed or edited to fit many different settings.” I said something very similar in my response by using the familiar “Grumpy Cat” memes to emphasize my point. For your topic, it may be much harder for a blog post to be re-purposed compared to a flyer that is circulated on social media. I also did a flyer for my second campaign piece, but I did not have recomposition in mind. If I choose to stick with a flyer that is simply printed out, it will almost definitely not be re-purposed. With your topic in mind, I don’t think that you’ll have the problem of people editing your piece for negative purposes. I could easily see your blog posts being recirculated as a way to make women (STEM or other occupations) feel empowered regardless of their background. As for your flyer, I’m struggling with ways that it could be recomposed for better or for worse. I think possibly adding more pictures to the bottom of your flyer may help with this–ONLY if you want it to be recomposed. I think that it is a lovely piece, and I believe that it can stand alone as a powerful campaign piece. My only recommendation with the flyer is maybe providing a link at the bottom that directs readers to your blog, which will hopefully add to the rhetorical velocity of your campaign.