62
This Comment is an All-Timer
(hexbear.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2024
62 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15902 readers
379 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
I teach a writing class for (aspiring) scientists, and it is so hard to train some smart people out of writing this way. Some people just think that using big words and complicated sentence structure is the best (or only) way to communicate important ideas. The idea that you should always use the simplest language that will do the job takes a lot of getting used to for certain folks. The way some academics write does not help.
I think it comes back to media, the "scientist" in most films and tv shows will use big words to show how smart they are and these people internalise that idea.
No, it's mostly because STEM types (including me) have a lot to say (not necessarily insightful) but often lack the writing skills necessary to say them concisely because we focused on studying science instead of literature.
Literary writers who don't understand science and just make up mumbo jumbo have the exact opposite problem that we do.
Oh ok, I guess I was misunderstanding. And this is clearly your failure to communicate, not mine! /s
I feel like this says a lot about writers lol