| ▲ | orsorna 9 hours ago | |||||||
What's wild is that with a few minutes of manual editing it would give exponential return. For instance, a lead sentence in your section saying "here's why X" that was already described by your subheading is unnecessary and could have been wholly removed. | ||||||||
| ▲ | amarant 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
Exponential return? This is the front page of HN! What does exponential returns even look like? Are you saying this post is a few edits away from becoming a New York Times bestseller? | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | therealdrag0 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
That’s pretty presumptive of how obviously the author could improve it. As someone who writes a lot of docs, I find feedback and preferences varies wildly. They may just have well made it “worse” to your preferences by hand editing it more. | ||||||||
| ▲ | gzread 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
You'd have to have a good idea of how you want the document to read, which is half (or more) of the process of writing it. | ||||||||
| ▲ | antonvs 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
IME many people aren't very capable of editing their own work effectively. It's why "editor" exists as a profession. | ||||||||