4 ms·
That is indeed a take so spicy as to be shartworthy. Disliking this glurgy, fluff-laden narrative article style does not make one a soulless cryptofascist robot
by bitwize 1y ago
That is indeed a take so spicy as to be shartworthy. Disliking this glurgy, fluff-laden narrative article style does not make one a soulless cryptofascist robot. One could imagine a different format for the article that front-loads the interesting bits and then delves into background detail, rather than forcing the reader to wade through pages of lit-fic-wannabe padding to get to the money shot. Articles used to be written this way all the time, but that was before writers and magazines were paid by the ad view.
- cwmoore 1y agoTake out the flying duck “sh***rthy” and you will have made an excellent series of points.
- gramie 1y agoI'm not a very critical reader*. When I read something, I don't have conversations with myself about "this could be better if..." or "the writer shouldn't have..." Instead, I accept what has been proffered and at the end decide if it had value for me. * unless I make a conscious effort to, like when I'm asked to review someone's work