• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    In an ecosystem full of text-based discussions, a single individual putting up an enormous wall of text that fails to engage the reader is often ignored in favor of a number of smaller posts layout out the argument piecemeal.

    Also, iterative comments expressing the same view in a few short words can reinforce the idea as popular in the eyes of a reader. A long winded spiel can come across as defensive, by comparison, and weaken the argument in the end.

    • cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      You’re explaining what is and I’m saying the way this is has me seriously concerned. Its bad. This is bad. It’s the opposite of good.

      I’m not confused about what it is. I’m saying the thing you described is bad.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        This is bad. It’s the opposite of good.

        It’s a heuristic for absorbing information that’s predicated on people not having infinite time or attention.

        Lots of Wall Of Text posts aren’t actually worth reading.

        • cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          infinite

          See, I feel like ‘can read a book every month or so’ isn’t all that much.

          That this is considered broadly difficult, much less impossible is terrifying. Something is very very wrong here.

          The fact you don’t understand that simple idea despite reading it (I hope reading it) like five times here is not promising. I feel like if we’re just going to keep looping here, I’m done.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            59 minutes ago

            See, I feel like ‘can read a book every month or so’ isn’t all that much.

            Can’t read a book if you’re wasting all your time online reading posts.

            you don’t understand that simple idea despite reading it

            What if simple ideas aren’t the best way to view the world? What if you need to understand complex ideas?

            But how do you convey complex ideas to a large audience efficiently? Do you drown them in walls of text? Or do you break down the complex ideas into shorter, discrete components?

            Think about it this way. Do you read a book all at once, cover to cover, in one sitting? Or do you tackle it by paragraphs and chapters, bit by bit, over an extended period of time?