site banner
CertainlyWorse  No one is coming. It's just you.  3d ago (text post)   890 thread views

Speechcraft and Pithiness: Give your tips here

This isn't a large question. Because of the users we have here, I think we could all benefit from short sharp tips to edit our own words.

In this topic, can you provide advice on how to curate yourself when you throw words in speech and on 'paper'.

Links to 'speechcraft' sources are appreciated.

I'll start:

  • Take a second to think about how someone else would hear your words if they were you. (rule 0)
  • Curate and cut your words before you throw them.
  • "Brevity is the soul of wit" - Hamlet - Shakespeare.
6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

In our “infinite things to read” age, everyone should start by mentioning unusual conclusions or interesting bits of information at the start of a post. If the conclusion isn’t deemed unusual or if interesting bits aren’t considered interesting enough, then it’s easy to opt out of reading. Even reading three paragraphs needlessly in a day winds up saving you a whole book of reading a year. It adds up.

I disagree. Any technique which Tiktok uses will only accelerate our collective brainrot. These techniques actually work, but I don't think that's a good enough argument to use them.

What is the advantage of this over reading effortposts starting with the concluding paragraph?

People don’t always adhere to the high school essay format, and the conclusion may not include every interesting piece of information in the post or every interesting takeaway

I fail to see how "please put the conclusion at the start" is any easier than "please put a conclusion at the end" in this regard.

If people are going to adhere to a format they can adhere to either.

If people are not going to adhere to a format they are unlikely to adhere to either.

tl;dr: putting the unique info up front gives the reader the most important bit first, then lets them decide if they want to wade into the details.

See also: abstracts in scientific papers. I could expand farther on my point with examples, but I frontloaded so much of the main idea there's not much meaningful stuff left to say.

Also, putting the tldr at the bottom of a post is bad netiquette used by people that don't grasp the literal attitude of too long; didn't read.

Let me rephrase:

I see three valid approaches:

  1. Structure things with the conclusion at the start, and have the convention be to skip over the conclusion if reading the full thing, then read the rest, then read the conclusion.
  2. Structure things with the conclusion at the start, and have the convention be to read the conclusion then read the rest.
  3. Structure things with the conclusion at the end, and have people who may wish to skip read the last paragraph first to decide if they should read the rest.

Also, putting the tldr at the bottom of a post is bad netiquette

Putting the tldr at the bottom matches perfectly with a convention that people who are unsure should read the end first to check.

I'm ambivalent about the idea. I absolutely hate wannabe writers taking out their frustrations on news articles, and enjoy it when someone arranges the info in the exact manner you describe*, and yet somehow it feel blasphemous to the written word, and when I write I gravitate to "gather 'round, I'ma tell you a story" style myself.

*) Funnily enough the only newspaper I'm aware of that's doing this is the Daily Mail.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats