6 ms·

I love thinking on paper. In this case, I’m not going to go back and edit this entry so it looks like I had it all along. No, I’d rather show you my thought pro

by hvs 16y ago

I love thinking on paper. In this case, I’m not going to go back and edit this entry so it looks like I had it all along. No, I’d rather show you my thought process. Actually, I'd rather read a well-thought out argument that has been edited than trying to parse your thought process. I ended up stopping halfway through.

kqr2 16y ago
tldr summary: Could it be that the difference between a generalist and a dabbler is just saying “this is as done as it’s going to be” and shipping the work?
lionhearted 16y ago
> Actually, I'd rather read a well-thought out argument that has been edited than trying to parse your thought process. I ended up stopping halfway through. Thanks for letting us know? Seriously, the whole piece is 800 words. You didn't have time to read because you'd prefer 50 words shaved off with tighter editing... well okay, I understand if you're a busy guy that likes dense information. But then you have time to post a snarky comment? You lost me there.
- YuriNiyazov 16y ago
  He has a point. If you are willing to take some constructive criticism: When writing an essay, consider every instance of "I", "my" and "you" as you would a global variable in code: it needs to be there only when that's the cleanest and most efficient way to express that thought. It has very little to do with being busy, and a lot to do with wanting to read stuff that's readable.
- sfk 16y ago
  hvs did not say that he didn't have time to read it. Your writing style is simply horrible and incoherent and any sane person would stop halfway through.
  - mediaman 16y ago
    That's unnecessarily harsh. But I do agree that editing serves a purpose. There is a reason that good writers' essays, such as PG's, for example, are so durable through time: they have been finely honed, eliminating wasted words and poor analogies, to communicate an idea so purely that it captures the mind. Sebastian's writing isn't poor. It's just not finished. There's a gem of an idea there, but it's still covered in the dirt and grime of poor syntax and wordiness. And like a diamond that goes unnoticed because it hasn't been polished, it will quickly be forgotten, under the massive heaps of poor syntax and crude wordiness that society, and the Internet in particular, generates every day. He could find his ideas traveling farther if he polished his diamonds.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- donaq 16y ago
  I read the whole thing, and I think your parent does have a point. If you don't mind some criticism: That was my first guess – my first guess was that the difference between a generalist and a dabbler was that the generalist had some overarching theme or purpose, while the dabbler did not. That was pretty redundant, even as a part of your thought process, since you'd already told us that earlier on. Just telling us that you don't think an overarching theme was it would have sufficed. And following that: I don’t think that’s the answer. You just said that a couple of sentences back. What I'm trying to say is that, while showing us your thought process did illustrate how you arrived at your conclusion, an outline of your thought process would still have read better if you had tightened it up some. Showing us your thought process by literally repeating it verbatim might strike some readers as self-indulgent. Other than that, good points. :)
patricklynch 16y ago
Another take: This was my favorite line in the piece. A reminder that even very smart people (I think Sebastian counts) have to work through things one step at a time. And I enjoyed seeing the process unfold. I liken it to watching a painter as he works through a portrait, or maybe a screencast from a really good programmer.

by hvs 16y ago

kqr2 16y ago

tldr summary: Could it be that the difference between a generalist and a dabbler is just saying “this is as done as it’s going to be” and shipping the work?

lionhearted 16y ago

> Actually, I'd rather read a well-thought out argument that has been edited than trying to parse your thought process. I ended up stopping halfway through. Thanks for letting us know? Seriously, the whole piece is 800 words. You didn't have time to read because you'd prefer 50 words shaved off with tighter editing... well okay, I understand if you're a busy guy that likes dense information. But then you have time to post a snarky comment? You lost me there.

YuriNiyazov 16y ago
He has a point. If you are willing to take some constructive criticism: When writing an essay, consider every instance of "I", "my" and "you" as you would a global variable in code: it needs to be there only when that's the cleanest and most efficient way to express that thought. It has very little to do with being busy, and a lot to do with wanting to read stuff that's readable.
sfk 16y ago
hvs did not say that he didn't have time to read it. Your writing style is simply horrible and incoherent and any sane person would stop halfway through.
- mediaman 16y ago
  That's unnecessarily harsh. But I do agree that editing serves a purpose. There is a reason that good writers' essays, such as PG's, for example, are so durable through time: they have been finely honed, eliminating wasted words and poor analogies, to communicate an idea so purely that it captures the mind. Sebastian's writing isn't poor. It's just not finished. There's a gem of an idea there, but it's still covered in the dirt and grime of poor syntax and wordiness. And like a diamond that goes unnoticed because it hasn't been polished, it will quickly be forgotten, under the massive heaps of poor syntax and crude wordiness that society, and the Internet in particular, generates every day. He could find his ideas traveling farther if he polished his diamonds.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
donaq 16y ago
I read the whole thing, and I think your parent does have a point. If you don't mind some criticism: That was my first guess – my first guess was that the difference between a generalist and a dabbler was that the generalist had some overarching theme or purpose, while the dabbler did not. That was pretty redundant, even as a part of your thought process, since you'd already told us that earlier on. Just telling us that you don't think an overarching theme was it would have sufficed. And following that: I don’t think that’s the answer. You just said that a couple of sentences back. What I'm trying to say is that, while showing us your thought process did illustrate how you arrived at your conclusion, an outline of your thought process would still have read better if you had tightened it up some. Showing us your thought process by literally repeating it verbatim might strike some readers as self-indulgent. Other than that, good points. :)

patricklynch 16y ago

Another take: This was my favorite line in the piece. A reminder that even very smart people (I think Sebastian counts) have to work through things one step at a time. And I enjoyed seeing the process unfold. I liken it to watching a painter as he works through a portrait, or maybe a screencast from a really good programmer.