4 ms·

The ironic thing in this instance is that in a way the author is clearly negating his point by needing to show the crossed-out text. Imagine you had followed th

The ironic thing in this instance is that in a way the author is clearly negating his point by needing to show the crossed-out text. Imagine you had followed the link, and the only text was "Fewer words create a more powerful message." We would likely feel cheated at some level, like "That's it? How did one sentence get a whole HN link?" In a way we're conditioned to expect a bunch of garbage filler that we merely skim, and because that's what's in demand right now it's what authors are incentivized to provide.

vinceguidry 13y ago
I came here to say this. Brevity is not the goal. Mindless brevity destroys context. Concision is the goal. Bake the context into your prose. If you can't be concise, don't attempt to be brief. It will only annoy your readers.
echohack 13y ago
The reality is that you need BOTH. This is how modern news articles are written: http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/24/4698382/second-lifes-strange-second-life http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/24/4698382/second-lifes-stran... Some people will skim and get the information. Some people will read and get entertainment. Some people want the details, because they need a deeper understanding. Some people want a high level overview, because they already understand things and just want the information. See also: Richard Feynman's books on physics.
- _mulder_ 13y ago
  A good example to prove the OP. Your Second Life article probably has some interesting things to say, I wouldn't know, I didn't read it. Instead I clicked the link, scrolled and scrolled and before I'd even got to the bottom I'd calculated it would take me about half an hour of my life to read the thing. I don't want to invest half an hour of my life in learning about someone's blow-by-blow account of their Second Life experience (I'd question anybody who does and point them to one of the numerous HN articles on procrastination/wasted time). An article that long devoted only to Second Life (condescension aside, there really are more important things, honestly) seems pretentious and serving the authors Ego more than the readers curiosity. Richard Feynman however, the secrets of the universe and world around us, yes, I would like to learn more about that.

vinceguidry 13y ago

I came here to say this. Brevity is not the goal. Mindless brevity destroys context. Concision is the goal. Bake the context into your prose. If you can't be concise, don't attempt to be brief. It will only annoy your readers.

echohack 13y ago

The reality is that you need BOTH. This is how modern news articles are written: http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/24/4698382/second-lifes-strange-second-life http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/24/4698382/second-lifes-stran... Some people will skim and get the information. Some people will read and get entertainment. Some people want the details, because they need a deeper understanding. Some people want a high level overview, because they already understand things and just want the information. See also: Richard Feynman's books on physics.

_mulder_ 13y ago
A good example to prove the OP. Your Second Life article probably has some interesting things to say, I wouldn't know, I didn't read it. Instead I clicked the link, scrolled and scrolled and before I'd even got to the bottom I'd calculated it would take me about half an hour of my life to read the thing. I don't want to invest half an hour of my life in learning about someone's blow-by-blow account of their Second Life experience (I'd question anybody who does and point them to one of the numerous HN articles on procrastination/wasted time). An article that long devoted only to Second Life (condescension aside, there really are more important things, honestly) seems pretentious and serving the authors Ego more than the readers curiosity. Richard Feynman however, the secrets of the universe and world around us, yes, I would like to learn more about that.