3 ms·

I have noted this with several high ranking posts on HN. I wonder whether it's a case of the author being unaware of BLUF, or simply that they want you to read

I have noted this with several high ranking posts on HN. I wonder whether it's a case of the author being unaware of BLUF, or simply that they want you to read their work before finding the conclusion?

sokoloff 6y ago
I see it a lot at work and chalk it up to some people having learned/internalized a legalistic way of building up a pattern of facts and basing each on the previous. It’s not so much that they want you to read 2 pages but that they want you to believe every newly introduced bit of the story.
- lovemenot 6y ago
  Here in Japan too, bottom-up is the standard pattern. Japanese people can learn to use BLUF, but it's very much not the culturally expected approach.
  - alias_neo 6y ago
    It makes sense if you're telling a story, and that I understand. But when you're trying to make a point, I feel like it's more respectful of people's time to get to the point; if they want details they can read on. How does that fit with the culturally expected approach in Japan? If you're sharing a revelation, is it still normal to build up rather than start with the answer?
    - lovemenot 6y ago
      >> you're trying to make a point I here this is the root of the divergence. YOU are not trying to make a point. If a point is there, your role is only to help to reveal it. In other words, it should be in balance and objective.
      - lovemenot 6y ago
        It's too late to edit. The first line should be split between your comment and my reply.
- alias_neo 6y ago
  It makes sense, but I'm a big fan of the TL;DR approach; if you're sharing a point, get to it, then embellish all you like after that. If someone clicked through, bought your book, whatever to find out, what does 1+1 equal; start with "1+1 = 2. The following is a long and detailed account of why...". On a tangent, I find it quite refreshing in film when they start with the punchline. You know what happens in the end before you even start; if it's a good film, it's still worth watching, even knowing the end.

sokoloff 6y ago

I see it a lot at work and chalk it up to some people having learned/internalized a legalistic way of building up a pattern of facts and basing each on the previous. It’s not so much that they want you to read 2 pages but that they want you to believe every newly introduced bit of the story.

lovemenot 6y ago
Here in Japan too, bottom-up is the standard pattern. Japanese people can learn to use BLUF, but it's very much not the culturally expected approach.
- alias_neo 6y ago
  It makes sense if you're telling a story, and that I understand. But when you're trying to make a point, I feel like it's more respectful of people's time to get to the point; if they want details they can read on. How does that fit with the culturally expected approach in Japan? If you're sharing a revelation, is it still normal to build up rather than start with the answer?
  - lovemenot 6y ago
    >> you're trying to make a point I here this is the root of the divergence. YOU are not trying to make a point. If a point is there, your role is only to help to reveal it. In other words, it should be in balance and objective.
    - lovemenot 6y ago
      It's too late to edit. The first line should be split between your comment and my reply.
alias_neo 6y ago
It makes sense, but I'm a big fan of the TL;DR approach; if you're sharing a point, get to it, then embellish all you like after that. If someone clicked through, bought your book, whatever to find out, what does 1+1 equal; start with "1+1 = 2. The following is a long and detailed account of why...". On a tangent, I find it quite refreshing in film when they start with the punchline. You know what happens in the end before you even start; if it's a good film, it's still worth watching, even knowing the end.