4 ms·

I know that negative criticism can hurt, no matter how insignificant or pointless. So to people like Steve Yegge, Joel Spolsky, the 37signal guys, pg, and many

by edw519 16y ago

I know that negative criticism can hurt, no matter how insignificant or pointless. So to people like Steve Yegge, Joel Spolsky, the 37signal guys, pg, and many others who put part of themselves out there for the benefit of others, I suggest putting things into perspective with this handy formula: Let n = the number of people whose lives your writing has effected. Let m = the average magnitude of that effect. Let e = the distribution effect of your medium (for one on one, e = 1,in a room of others, e = 2, print, e = 3, popular blog or forum, e = 4, etc.) Let z = the sum of all the negativity of those who don't matter. Then if the net total effect of your writing is A, we can say: A = (n*m)**e - z So, for almost any value of z, A will remain positive. Keep on writing. Please.

tjogin 16y ago
I don't think any of Steve's critics is imploring him to stop writing altogether — they're asking him to start writing well.
- scotch_drinker 16y ago
  What exactly is it about Steve's writing that is bad? Bad writers almost never have a following and certainly never have the following that Steve has acquired. I would argue the contrary, that Steve's writing is quite good in that it evokes an emotion in the reader almost without exception. The emotion may be positive or negative but the fact that the emotion exists is evidence that his writing is not bad. Maybe you disagree with it or maybe you find it objectionably long but those things are different from saying he is a bad writer. I think Steve's critics are typically angry about something he has written about one of their hobby horses but I strongly doubt too many of them are imploring him to write better.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - pvg 16y ago
    Bad writers almost never have a following Let's see, the guy who wrote the Da Vinci Code, the lady who writes the Twilight books, Ayn Rand, oh we could go on. Now, if you're willing to redefine the meaning of 'good' to mean 'creates a response' then a lot of bad things can pass for good. But it's the sort of silliness that might evince a response that is not, you know, good.
    - wingo 16y ago
      That could be a bad sign -- I pasted in my lasted blog to the http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1514016 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1514016 from a few days ago, and got Dan Brown. Surely a bug! Then the next two also came up Dan Brown. Doh!
    - crpatino 16y ago
      >> ...the guy who wrote the Da Vinci Code, the lady who writes the Twilight books, Ayn Rand, oh we could go on. Shall we call those the Good-Enough-Writers (TM)? Seriously, truly awful anything do not ever see the daylight. Not even the children of emperors make it to public life if they not manage to make it to average (unless as posers or puppets). The Da Vinci Code is cheesy, but otherwise well written. Dan Brown is not going to make it to the classics, but is not an idiot either. Same can be said about Steve Yegge. His writing is opinionated, controversial, and sometimes grammatically incorrect (which I read as a token of informality rather than sheer ignorance). But the guy has a bunch of fresh ideas! You cannot have any good idea if you don't push the limits and throw some crazy shit as byproduct.
      - pvg 16y ago
        The Da Vinci Code is cheesy, but otherwise well written The Da Vinci Code is so poorly written, it's spawned a minor cottage industry of amusing commentary about how poorly it is written. A good place to start is here: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000844.html http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000844.h... [heh, I wonder what refined consumer of English literature and fan of Dan Brown was so upset by this so as to downvote it]
  - patio11 16y ago
    Bad writers almost never have a following Much like software, television, food, movies, etc, product quality is not the sole determinant of market success. The author who sold more books than anyone else in the United States last year, for example, is a wretchedly poor writer. (Let's just say "Product/market fit covers many sins" and we'll leave it at that.)
    - beza1e1 16y ago
      Whom are you talking about? James Patterson?
  - starkfist 16y ago
    Evoking emotion is one of the easiest things to do as a writer. You do not have to be a good writer to evoke emotion.
  - Alex3917 16y ago
    "Steve's writing is quite good in that it evokes an emotion in the reader almost without exception." The fact that it's somewhat formulaic is probably what annoys a lot of people. Personally I enjoy formulaic nonfiction, but almost every writer in the genre has a ton of haters, e.g. Malcolm Gladwell, Seth Godin, Zed Shaw, etc.
- SoftwareMaven 16y ago
  I don't understand this. With all of the many people who provide their writings for free on the internet, why even care about somebody whose writing you don't like? I really don't care for Jeff Atwood's writing, but I don't tell him to change or to stop writing. I don't read his blog. My only conclusion is that the negative people actually don't give a crap about his writing/style/length/whatever. What they care about is his success and how it shows they don't have it.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - bmm6o 16y ago
    > What they care about is his success and how it shows they don't have it. I think this isn't quite right. In general, the people criticizing him aren't other bloggers who are jealous that he has more readers than them. I think it's simply that they feel he is undeservedly popular, and that his following/influence is out of proportion with his talent. You see this kind of backlash against commercially successful/critically panned art all the time. With a blog, it's one of the few places the commentary gets so close to the art. [for the record, I like his writing and am glad he's back]
- danh 16y ago
  Steve writes, for example: "She was pulling out a giant needle as she told me this. It just sort of materialized from under the table, the way a knife appears in a bar fight. It was a very large needle." I'd say that's some rather good writing right there.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
Kaizyn 16y ago
There's one thing your analysis is missing: A has a diffuse effect across the entire Internet community; whereas, z directly and personally affects the writer. Even if A >>> z, the impact of z on a writer can still be unpleasant enough that it isn't worth it to them to continue in their work.

by edw519 16y ago

tjogin 16y ago

I don't think any of Steve's critics is imploring him to stop writing altogether — they're asking him to start writing well.

scotch_drinker 16y ago
What exactly is it about Steve's writing that is bad? Bad writers almost never have a following and certainly never have the following that Steve has acquired. I would argue the contrary, that Steve's writing is quite good in that it evokes an emotion in the reader almost without exception. The emotion may be positive or negative but the fact that the emotion exists is evidence that his writing is not bad. Maybe you disagree with it or maybe you find it objectionably long but those things are different from saying he is a bad writer. I think Steve's critics are typically angry about something he has written about one of their hobby horses but I strongly doubt too many of them are imploring him to write better.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- pvg 16y ago
  Bad writers almost never have a following Let's see, the guy who wrote the Da Vinci Code, the lady who writes the Twilight books, Ayn Rand, oh we could go on. Now, if you're willing to redefine the meaning of 'good' to mean 'creates a response' then a lot of bad things can pass for good. But it's the sort of silliness that might evince a response that is not, you know, good.
  - wingo 16y ago
    That could be a bad sign -- I pasted in my lasted blog to the http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1514016 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1514016 from a few days ago, and got Dan Brown. Surely a bug! Then the next two also came up Dan Brown. Doh!
  - crpatino 16y ago
    >> ...the guy who wrote the Da Vinci Code, the lady who writes the Twilight books, Ayn Rand, oh we could go on. Shall we call those the Good-Enough-Writers (TM)? Seriously, truly awful anything do not ever see the daylight. Not even the children of emperors make it to public life if they not manage to make it to average (unless as posers or puppets). The Da Vinci Code is cheesy, but otherwise well written. Dan Brown is not going to make it to the classics, but is not an idiot either. Same can be said about Steve Yegge. His writing is opinionated, controversial, and sometimes grammatically incorrect (which I read as a token of informality rather than sheer ignorance). But the guy has a bunch of fresh ideas! You cannot have any good idea if you don't push the limits and throw some crazy shit as byproduct.
    - pvg 16y ago
      The Da Vinci Code is cheesy, but otherwise well written The Da Vinci Code is so poorly written, it's spawned a minor cottage industry of amusing commentary about how poorly it is written. A good place to start is here: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000844.html http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000844.h... [heh, I wonder what refined consumer of English literature and fan of Dan Brown was so upset by this so as to downvote it]
- patio11 16y ago
  Bad writers almost never have a following Much like software, television, food, movies, etc, product quality is not the sole determinant of market success. The author who sold more books than anyone else in the United States last year, for example, is a wretchedly poor writer. (Let's just say "Product/market fit covers many sins" and we'll leave it at that.)
  - beza1e1 16y ago
    Whom are you talking about? James Patterson?
- starkfist 16y ago
  Evoking emotion is one of the easiest things to do as a writer. You do not have to be a good writer to evoke emotion.
- Alex3917 16y ago
  "Steve's writing is quite good in that it evokes an emotion in the reader almost without exception." The fact that it's somewhat formulaic is probably what annoys a lot of people. Personally I enjoy formulaic nonfiction, but almost every writer in the genre has a ton of haters, e.g. Malcolm Gladwell, Seth Godin, Zed Shaw, etc.
SoftwareMaven 16y ago
I don't understand this. With all of the many people who provide their writings for free on the internet, why even care about somebody whose writing you don't like? I really don't care for Jeff Atwood's writing, but I don't tell him to change or to stop writing. I don't read his blog. My only conclusion is that the negative people actually don't give a crap about his writing/style/length/whatever. What they care about is his success and how it shows they don't have it.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- bmm6o 16y ago
  > What they care about is his success and how it shows they don't have it. I think this isn't quite right. In general, the people criticizing him aren't other bloggers who are jealous that he has more readers than them. I think it's simply that they feel he is undeservedly popular, and that his following/influence is out of proportion with his talent. You see this kind of backlash against commercially successful/critically panned art all the time. With a blog, it's one of the few places the commentary gets so close to the art. [for the record, I like his writing and am glad he's back]
danh 16y ago
Steve writes, for example: "She was pulling out a giant needle as she told me this. It just sort of materialized from under the table, the way a knife appears in a bar fight. It was a very large needle." I'd say that's some rather good writing right there.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

Kaizyn 16y ago

There's one thing your analysis is missing: A has a diffuse effect across the entire Internet community; whereas, z directly and personally affects the writer. Even if A >>> z, the impact of z on a writer can still be unpleasant enough that it isn't worth it to them to continue in their work.