4 ms·

That first paragraph, not a great start when I have to do mental gymnastics just to figure out what the blog post is even about. If you can't write about a sub

That first paragraph, not a great start when I have to do mental gymnastics just to figure out what the blog post is even about. If you can't write about a subject directly, use creative license and make the situation up. Nobody knows / is going to find it different and it will help get your point across. I bailed on this article after the first paragraph.

coastflow 4y ago
>"If you can't write about a subject directly, use creative license and make the situation up. Nobody knows / is going to find it different and it will help get your point across." Making up a situation—without disclosing that it is fiction—is risky in a practical sense and also morally questionable. Readers typically don't like to be deceived when reading non-fiction. If a specific detail is fabricated and a reader notices, a reader can assume that the writer is sloppy/deceptive, and become far more skeptical with the rest of the author's works. Undisclosed fabrication can also lead to unsound conclusions (for example, an article could rely on the existence of a counter-example to disprove a rule, but a fabricated counter-example would make the argument fail to be valid). Furthermore, suppose a reader cites an article with a fabricated story, relying on that story to make a point. If the story is false, the reader would take a reputational hit as well. In a moral sense, it's better for the reader to avoid fabricating situations. It is typically good practice to make an article introduction easy-to-understand with minimal jargon, but creative license should always be disclosed when writing about a hypothetical situation. It leads to higher-quality reasoning (by avoiding arguments that rely on false anecdotal evidence) and is simple to disclose (e.g. "Consider a hypothetical: ...").
- aunty_helen 4y ago
  They’re called business fables, five dysfunctions of a team being a classic, well known, best selling one. It’s a common way of conveying information that might come from several related experiences and built on to drive home meaning. People don’t like to be deceived to the point they’ll go out of their way to believe a story is true until presented with unrefutable evidence that it’s false. Even then they’ll prefer to believe the original lie. This is called the backfire effect.
- throwaway290 4y ago
  You wrote four paragraphs assuming your parent comment urged authors to pass fiction for facts. There are tons of stylistic choices (using names like Bob and Alice, etc.) that make it clear when something is meant as an illustrative example. Let's not cancel the metaphor. That aside, I'd be very concerned if someone took everything they read as truth unless declared otherwise. I think the overwhelmingly common behavior is to explicitly mark a real story, not the opposite.
eyelidlessness 4y ago
I think the author—rightly in my case—assumed they have an audience who already knew the context based on the title, and the tweet which prompted it, pictured a bit further. Not all of us spend a lot of time on Twitter, it’s okay to feel the intro lacked context. It’s also okay to wade into something unfamiliar and patiently find out if you’ll get something out of it. Probably 90% of the best things I’ve read from a HN link have been completely context-bare for me when I clicked through to read. You probably spent more time writing this than it would have taken to read far enough to gain the context you were lacking. Not that you’re obligated of course. But maybe it’d be more productive for you and everyone if you quickly dismiss by moving on to the next thing.
- aunty_helen 4y ago
  This could be said about any criticism. It’s also perfectly valid to point out flaws in a style of writing. It’s so common, a lot of places have comment sections where people can leave their opinions. As for making assumptions, that’s fine, I read heavy technical stuff on hn a lot and often find myself out of depth and unable to gain benefit that would apply to me from an article. So often I’ll just stop reading and go about my day. But really, having an obtuse opener on a blog post serves no one. There’s just no flow to it.
- OrderlyTiamat 4y ago
  I think this is a part of the reason so many people focus on the comments over the article. I've found that whether there are a lot of comments and good healthy discussion is a excellent marker for article quality. The first paragraph(s) frequently are not. I agree with the 90% experience, but I have to say it is very hit and miss: let's say like 50% of posts that start badly are bad throughout. (And I do consider starting with an assumed context to be starting badly. It takes just a sentence to describe the fact _that there is context_ not present in the article if you don't want to include it outright)
OrderlyTiamat 4y ago
I would amend that to "nobody cares"; it's totally fine to discuss a hypothetical if it lets you skip irrelevant details that slog down your point. Readers presumably are interested in the point you are making rather than the details. This article is a good example where it would have helped. I did read it, (just forget aboit the start, it gets readable a couple paragraphs in) but I was also inclined to close the site after the initial paragraph. Starting like that doesn't invite to read.

coastflow 4y ago

>"If you can't write about a subject directly, use creative license and make the situation up. Nobody knows / is going to find it different and it will help get your point across." Making up a situation—without disclosing that it is fiction—is risky in a practical sense and also morally questionable. Readers typically don't like to be deceived when reading non-fiction. If a specific detail is fabricated and a reader notices, a reader can assume that the writer is sloppy/deceptive, and become far more skeptical with the rest of the author's works. Undisclosed fabrication can also lead to unsound conclusions (for example, an article could rely on the existence of a counter-example to disprove a rule, but a fabricated counter-example would make the argument fail to be valid). Furthermore, suppose a reader cites an article with a fabricated story, relying on that story to make a point. If the story is false, the reader would take a reputational hit as well. In a moral sense, it's better for the reader to avoid fabricating situations. It is typically good practice to make an article introduction easy-to-understand with minimal jargon, but creative license should always be disclosed when writing about a hypothetical situation. It leads to higher-quality reasoning (by avoiding arguments that rely on false anecdotal evidence) and is simple to disclose (e.g. "Consider a hypothetical: ...").

aunty_helen 4y ago
They’re called business fables, five dysfunctions of a team being a classic, well known, best selling one. It’s a common way of conveying information that might come from several related experiences and built on to drive home meaning. People don’t like to be deceived to the point they’ll go out of their way to believe a story is true until presented with unrefutable evidence that it’s false. Even then they’ll prefer to believe the original lie. This is called the backfire effect.
throwaway290 4y ago
You wrote four paragraphs assuming your parent comment urged authors to pass fiction for facts. There are tons of stylistic choices (using names like Bob and Alice, etc.) that make it clear when something is meant as an illustrative example. Let's not cancel the metaphor. That aside, I'd be very concerned if someone took everything they read as truth unless declared otherwise. I think the overwhelmingly common behavior is to explicitly mark a real story, not the opposite.

eyelidlessness 4y ago

I think the author—rightly in my case—assumed they have an audience who already knew the context based on the title, and the tweet which prompted it, pictured a bit further. Not all of us spend a lot of time on Twitter, it’s okay to feel the intro lacked context. It’s also okay to wade into something unfamiliar and patiently find out if you’ll get something out of it. Probably 90% of the best things I’ve read from a HN link have been completely context-bare for me when I clicked through to read. You probably spent more time writing this than it would have taken to read far enough to gain the context you were lacking. Not that you’re obligated of course. But maybe it’d be more productive for you and everyone if you quickly dismiss by moving on to the next thing.

aunty_helen 4y ago
This could be said about any criticism. It’s also perfectly valid to point out flaws in a style of writing. It’s so common, a lot of places have comment sections where people can leave their opinions. As for making assumptions, that’s fine, I read heavy technical stuff on hn a lot and often find myself out of depth and unable to gain benefit that would apply to me from an article. So often I’ll just stop reading and go about my day. But really, having an obtuse opener on a blog post serves no one. There’s just no flow to it.
OrderlyTiamat 4y ago
I think this is a part of the reason so many people focus on the comments over the article. I've found that whether there are a lot of comments and good healthy discussion is a excellent marker for article quality. The first paragraph(s) frequently are not. I agree with the 90% experience, but I have to say it is very hit and miss: let's say like 50% of posts that start badly are bad throughout. (And I do consider starting with an assumed context to be starting badly. It takes just a sentence to describe the fact _that there is context_ not present in the article if you don't want to include it outright)

OrderlyTiamat 4y ago

I would amend that to "nobody cares"; it's totally fine to discuss a hypothetical if it lets you skip irrelevant details that slog down your point. Readers presumably are interested in the point you are making rather than the details. This article is a good example where it would have helped. I did read it, (just forget aboit the start, it gets readable a couple paragraphs in) but I was also inclined to close the site after the initial paragraph. Starting like that doesn't invite to read.