My writing is sloppy. Can anyone please suggest any resources where I can get feedback on my writing, or personalized instructions that will improve my processes to make me a better writer?
In the meantime I’ll try to adopt this “one simple trick”: each time I write a piece, I will read it out aloud to myself. If it is “tough on the ear” or I stumble while sight reading it, I will edit the offending section until it is neither.
Also, I’ll continue to get LLMs to summarize the points in a given piece. If there’s something I feel is missing in it’s summary or appears to misinterpret an argument, then I shall edit accordingly.
Also, Also, two bad habits I will try to stop are ‘disunity of pronoun’, and using the ‘royal we’. Disunity of Pronoun is this habit I have of switching between “you will find… you ever notice” to “we have this tendency” “we still don’t know” and even “they cannot fathom” “I for one”. And the Royal We is when I generalize human traits as immutable or universal, “we all need love” “we long for purpose”, which is just kinda cringe.
Three! Three bad habits. [1]The third bad habit I intend to stop, INCLUDES writing too many “buts”.[2] Here is an example:
”I really enjoy Direct Cinema documentaries because you’re watching people just going about their tasks—they aren’t performing to you. In Jacques Tati’s Playtime there are many scenes of people watching other people going about their tasks but that is a scripted comedy not a Documentary. But I think the appeal works with both”
I’ve read your article before and found it to be good advice. I have tried to take the first warning about ambiguous use of “this” to heart for a while now.
I might have to get the courage to engage the feedback service.
inasmuch as personalised advice is possible just from reading this post (and as, inter alia, a pro copyeditor), here’s mine—have a clear idea of the purpose and venue for your writing, and internalise ‘rules’ about writing as context-dependent only.
“We” to refer to humanity in general is entirely appropriate in some contexts (and making too broad generalisations about humanity is a separate issue from the pronoun use).
The ‘buts’ issue—at least in the example you shared—is at least in part a ‘this clause doesn’t need to exist’ issue. If necessary you could just add “(scripted)” before “scenes”.
Did someone advise you to do what you are doing with LLMs? I am not sure that optimising for legibility to LLM summarisers will do anything for the appeal of your writing to humans.
Did someone advise you to do what you are doing with LLMs? I am not sure that optimising for legibility to LLM summarisers will do anything for the appeal of your writing to humans.
Good question, no, no one advised me to use this technique but I use it as a last resort. I frequently feel that I am misunderstood in communication. Often I feel like people’s replies to me sound like replies from totally different conversations or statement/questions to the one I just made.
If an LLM seems to imply the focus is different or overemphasizes something I didn’t see as significant, then I see no reason to believe that isn’t indicative that humans will be dragged away by that too.
It may well be. It’s been my observation that what distracts/confuses them doesn’t necessarily line up with what confuses humans, but it might still be better than your guess if you think your guess is pretty bad
My writing is sloppy. Can anyone please suggest any resources where I can get feedback on my writing, or personalized instructions that will improve my processes to make me a better writer?
In the meantime I’ll try to adopt this “one simple trick”: each time I write a piece, I will read it out aloud to myself. If it is “tough on the ear” or I stumble while sight reading it, I will edit the offending section until it is neither.
Also, I’ll continue to get LLMs to summarize the points in a given piece. If there’s something I feel is missing in it’s summary or appears to misinterpret an argument, then I shall edit accordingly.
Also, Also, two bad habits I will try to stop are ‘disunity of pronoun’, and using the ‘royal we’. Disunity of Pronoun is this habit I have of switching between “you will find… you ever notice” to “we have this tendency” “we still don’t know” and even “they cannot fathom” “I for one”. And the Royal We is when I generalize human traits as immutable or universal, “we all need love” “we long for purpose”, which is just kinda cringe.
Three! Three bad habits. [1]The third bad habit I intend to stop, INCLUDES writing too many “buts”.[2] Here is an example:
”I really enjoy Direct Cinema documentaries because you’re watching people just going about their tasks—they aren’t performing to you. In Jacques Tati’s Playtime there are many scenes of people watching other people going about their tasks but that is a scripted comedy not a Documentary. But I think the appeal works with both”
I didn’t expect to make a Spanish Inquisition reference
Or any kind of contrasting conjunctive including but not limited to “but” “however” “yet” “nevertheless” “while(st)” “although”
For LessWrong posts specifically, there’s the feedback service.
This isn’t personalized, but I also have suggestions for people in the general LessWrong cluster here.
I’ve read your article before and found it to be good advice. I have tried to take the first warning about ambiguous use of “this” to heart for a while now.
I might have to get the courage to engage the feedback service.
I’m no writer or editor but you could email me. I check my email every few days lemonhope@fastmail.com
inasmuch as personalised advice is possible just from reading this post (and as, inter alia, a pro copyeditor), here’s mine—have a clear idea of the purpose and venue for your writing, and internalise ‘rules’ about writing as context-dependent only.
“We” to refer to humanity in general is entirely appropriate in some contexts (and making too broad generalisations about humanity is a separate issue from the pronoun use).
The ‘buts’ issue—at least in the example you shared—is at least in part a ‘this clause doesn’t need to exist’ issue. If necessary you could just add “(scripted)” before “scenes”.
Did someone advise you to do what you are doing with LLMs? I am not sure that optimising for legibility to LLM summarisers will do anything for the appeal of your writing to humans.
Good question, no, no one advised me to use this technique but I use it as a last resort. I frequently feel that I am misunderstood in communication. Often I feel like people’s replies to me sound like replies from totally different conversations or statement/questions to the one I just made.
If an LLM seems to imply the focus is different or overemphasizes something I didn’t see as significant, then I see no reason to believe that isn’t indicative that humans will be dragged away by that too.
It may well be. It’s been my observation that what distracts/confuses them doesn’t necessarily line up with what confuses humans, but it might still be better than your guess if you think your guess is pretty bad