Personally, I like posts that are short and to the point. It tell me that the poster has respect for the readers and took time to express his or her ideas clearly and concisely. I often upvote such posts just for style.
(“Potentially inchoate” is also a curious formulation: as if allowing for the possibility that it might actually be a completely polished and brilliantly insightful post, but still wanting to punish the author just in case it does turn out to be inchoate.)
What questions did you want answered? Can you give an example of a concrete improvement?
Was it inchoate in a way that caused you negative utility as a result of reading it? Do you think additional words would’ve made the experience of reading positive utility?
I have an “insight density” model of writing quality. I prefer to read writing that has lots of ideas per unit verbiage. I tend to assume other readers want the same, but if adding additional verbiage will improve the way others receive my writing, I will do it!
It’s a sketch of an analogy to make transhuman/posthuman activism more appealing to a small subset of the population: gamers who don’t yet think it sounds pretty nifty. It seems more open thready than discussiony to me.
I think it’s absolutely ridiculous that there is an attitude here that something is inferior because it is short.
Personally, I like posts that are short and to the point. It tell me that the poster has respect for the readers and took time to express his or her ideas clearly and concisely. I often upvote such posts just for style.
Short is not the only issue here. The issue is that is short and appears to be potentially inchoate.
Inchoate is okay in Discussion.
(“Potentially inchoate” is also a curious formulation: as if allowing for the possibility that it might actually be a completely polished and brilliantly insightful post, but still wanting to punish the author just in case it does turn out to be inchoate.)
What questions did you want answered? Can you give an example of a concrete improvement?
Was it inchoate in a way that caused you negative utility as a result of reading it? Do you think additional words would’ve made the experience of reading positive utility?
I have an “insight density” model of writing quality. I prefer to read writing that has lots of ideas per unit verbiage. I tend to assume other readers want the same, but if adding additional verbiage will improve the way others receive my writing, I will do it!
It’s a sketch of an analogy to make transhuman/posthuman activism more appealing to a small subset of the population: gamers who don’t yet think it sounds pretty nifty. It seems more open thready than discussiony to me.