A charitable explanation for this would be that people are unaccustomed to well written documents and so are more confident with their interrogation skills than your writing skills. Even with a well written document, the reader will need to get into the mindset of the writer, which requires effort. Whereas interviewing the writer allows the writer to share some of the mental effort for bridging the gap.
Several uncharitable explanations leap to mind as well, but they don’t seem helpful here.
A charitable explanation for this would be that people are unaccustomed to well written documents and so are more confident with their interrogation skills than your writing skills. Even with a well written document, the reader will need to get into the mindset of the writer, which requires effort. Whereas interviewing the writer allows the writer to share some of the mental effort for bridging the gap.
Several uncharitable explanations leap to mind as well, but they don’t seem helpful here.
[deleted—responded to the wrong post]