I find a lot of content online (videos and blogs) as well as offline (various books) are too long to the point of being disrespectful of my time.
If you’re writing a blog and incentivized to stuff in as many SEO terms as possible, you will do so at the expense of my time and irritation.
If you need to make a 10 minute video but really only have 2 minutes of content, you value those 8 minutes of my life at zero and unless I do to, I’m skipping through the filler.
Same thing with books. If your book contains one central argument, respect your reader enough to cut out the fat. I don’t need a comprehensive history of the subject if your argument can boil down to a few paragraphs.
> Same thing with books. If your book contains one central argument, respect your reader enough to cut out the fat. I don’t need a comprehensive history of the subject if your argument can boil down to a few paragraphs.
I tend to politely disagree with that. In most cases "comprehensive history of the subject" is important to understand the subject fully and, most importantly, reasons for the argument.
Currently we have endemic of people who suggest doing thing in particular way, but when you question reasoning, there will be no answer. It's picking up ideas here and there without understanding of premises, and it's very dangerous because idea without premises is likely inapplicable to slightly changed premises.
If you’re writing a blog and incentivized to stuff in as many SEO terms as possible, you will do so at the expense of my time and irritation.
If you need to make a 10 minute video but really only have 2 minutes of content, you value those 8 minutes of my life at zero and unless I do to, I’m skipping through the filler.
Same thing with books. If your book contains one central argument, respect your reader enough to cut out the fat. I don’t need a comprehensive history of the subject if your argument can boil down to a few paragraphs.