3 ms·

So maybe this article is a good example of why we§ let them: - It's ~2180 words long - It takes ~600 words (10 paragraphs) of stumbling around before the auth

by SCdF 10y ago

So maybe this article is a good example of why we§ let them: - It's ~2180 words long - It takes ~600 words (10 paragraphs) of stumbling around before the author reminds themselves of what we're actually here to talk about: the CIA rewriting (or erasing in this case) history - It takes another ~500 words (9 more paragraphs) before the article actually mentions the factual thing that happened that this article is about (document collections removed from public view). People can write how they like, and it might just be that you enjoy the way this person writes, and so enjoy the process of working through this prose to the meat of his point. However, I can't help but think that if this was shorter, and if it got to the heart of the issue quicker, more people might finish reading and comprehending it, and actually learn what the article is trying to get across. § I'm not from the US so when I say we I really more mean you (if you're from the US) but you get the gist

astazangasta 10y ago
Bad writing as the main bulwark of American power, I like it.
justifier 10y ago
i agree, i want the editorial to be given a backburner role in journalism stead its seat as the one true way in addition to burying even just the ideas in a mass of words, i think it frustrating and detrimental to also bury sources beyond discovery.. why every online article fails to have a hyperlink biblio at the bottom baffles me your criticism reminded me of another cia classic: the simple sabotage field manual(o); succinctly summarised here(i): > Insist on doing everything through "channels. "Never permit short-cuts to be taken in order to expedite decisions. > When possible, refer all matters to committees for "further study and consideration." Attempt to make the committees as large as possible -- never less than five. > Haggle over precise wordings of communications, minutes, resolutions. > Advocate "caution.""Be "reasonable" and urge your fellow-conferees to be "reasonable" and avoid haste which might result in embarrassments or difficulties later on. > "Misunderstand" orders. Ask endless questions or engage in long correspondence about such orders. Quibble over them when you can." > Don't order new working materials until your current stocks have been virtually exhausted so that the slightest delay in filling your order will mean a shutdown. > Insist on perfect work in relatively unimportant products, send back for refinishing those which have the least flaw. Approve other defective parts whose flaws are not visible to the naked eye. > When training new workers, give incomplete or misleading instructions. > Multiply paperwork in plausible ways. Start duplicate files. (o) https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-archive/2012-featured-story-archive/CleanedUOSSSimpleSabotage_sm.pdf https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-archive/... (i) http://www.business.com/company-culture/coworker-sabotoging-your-office-maybe-shes-a-cia-spy/ http://www.business.com/company-culture/coworker-sabotoging-...
- kafkaesq 10y ago
  Insist on doing everything through "channels" When possible, refer all matters to committees for "further study and consideration." Advocate "caution.""Be "reasonable" and urge your fellow-conferees to be "reasonable" and avoid haste which might result in embarrassments or difficulties later on. "Misunderstand" orders. Insist on perfect work in relatively unimportant products, send back for refinishing those which have the least flaw. Sounds like the way things normally roll at many departments and teams in certain BigCorps we know and love, without anyone actually doing these things with an attempt to be disruptive. It's just "the way things always work around here."
  - justifier 10y ago
    exactly.. the document simply draws the curtain back have you seen samantha bee's piece on super delegates where she breaks down the rest of the metaphor of the "great and powerful"?(o) you do realise the whole point was that oz wasn't powerful, right? oz is just a midwestern snake oil salesman displaced to a fantasy land full of cowards, heartless people, and strawmen (o) https://youtu.be/XtuWiHYmr4U?t=239 https://youtu.be/XtuWiHYmr4U?t=239 .. whole clip is worth a watch at 6m7s
  - maaku 10y ago
    That's... the point.
Apofis 10y ago
I was trying to write a summary of the article and while reading it I kept having to delete what I typed because he kept switching topics. I was like "Get to the point already!"
marricks 10y ago
Not that your complaint is invalid, but it's pretty depressing that the top voted comment is what amounts to a style criticism of an blatant misuse of government power.

by SCdF 10y ago

astazangasta 10y ago

Bad writing as the main bulwark of American power, I like it.

justifier 10y ago

i agree, i want the editorial to be given a backburner role in journalism stead its seat as the one true way in addition to burying even just the ideas in a mass of words, i think it frustrating and detrimental to also bury sources beyond discovery.. why every online article fails to have a hyperlink biblio at the bottom baffles me your criticism reminded me of another cia classic: the simple sabotage field manual(o); succinctly summarised here(i): > Insist on doing everything through "channels. "Never permit short-cuts to be taken in order to expedite decisions. > When possible, refer all matters to committees for "further study and consideration." Attempt to make the committees as large as possible -- never less than five. > Haggle over precise wordings of communications, minutes, resolutions. > Advocate "caution.""Be "reasonable" and urge your fellow-conferees to be "reasonable" and avoid haste which might result in embarrassments or difficulties later on. > "Misunderstand" orders. Ask endless questions or engage in long correspondence about such orders. Quibble over them when you can." > Don't order new working materials until your current stocks have been virtually exhausted so that the slightest delay in filling your order will mean a shutdown. > Insist on perfect work in relatively unimportant products, send back for refinishing those which have the least flaw. Approve other defective parts whose flaws are not visible to the naked eye. > When training new workers, give incomplete or misleading instructions. > Multiply paperwork in plausible ways. Start duplicate files. (o) https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-archive/2012-featured-story-archive/CleanedUOSSSimpleSabotage_sm.pdf https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-archive/... (i) http://www.business.com/company-culture/coworker-sabotoging-your-office-maybe-shes-a-cia-spy/ http://www.business.com/company-culture/coworker-sabotoging-...

kafkaesq 10y ago
Insist on doing everything through "channels" When possible, refer all matters to committees for "further study and consideration." Advocate "caution.""Be "reasonable" and urge your fellow-conferees to be "reasonable" and avoid haste which might result in embarrassments or difficulties later on. "Misunderstand" orders. Insist on perfect work in relatively unimportant products, send back for refinishing those which have the least flaw. Sounds like the way things normally roll at many departments and teams in certain BigCorps we know and love, without anyone actually doing these things with an attempt to be disruptive. It's just "the way things always work around here."
- justifier 10y ago
  exactly.. the document simply draws the curtain back have you seen samantha bee's piece on super delegates where she breaks down the rest of the metaphor of the "great and powerful"?(o) you do realise the whole point was that oz wasn't powerful, right? oz is just a midwestern snake oil salesman displaced to a fantasy land full of cowards, heartless people, and strawmen (o) https://youtu.be/XtuWiHYmr4U?t=239 https://youtu.be/XtuWiHYmr4U?t=239 .. whole clip is worth a watch at 6m7s
- maaku 10y ago
  That's... the point.

Apofis 10y ago

I was trying to write a summary of the article and while reading it I kept having to delete what I typed because he kept switching topics. I was like "Get to the point already!"

marricks 10y ago

Not that your complaint is invalid, but it's pretty depressing that the top voted comment is what amounts to a style criticism of an blatant misuse of government power.