Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm just starting up in London. Cambridge sounds like a good option. Are living costs really much cheaper?
No, not really.
care to elaborate?
Persuade xor Discover
111–117 of 117 posts
Re: Persuade xor Discover
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nice place and people but awful weather IMHO. I'm rather partial to the warmer climes. I've heard the traffic is a hassle there? Can you comment?
The traffic is a hassle only in the rush hour. Most tech companies here operate on flexitime specifically so their employees can avoid it, which works pretty well. Having said that, I haven't worked anywhere else. The perspective of someone who had would be useful.
How are the public transport options? I've been rather spoiled by underground/subway/metro in the big cities. Easy movement with a minimum of fuss. Backed by liberal use of cabs when shitty weather or rush hour threatens of course.
Re: Persuade xor Discover
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reading the article the biggest thing that hit me is that the two versions of the union paragraph are not equivalent at all. The first one says that the labor movement was not founded by heros. It insinuates that anyone who claims otherwise must despise current labor unions by contrast. And it leaves open the possibility that you're setting the reader up for a sudden about face where you come up with some non-obvious…
You know, as I was cutting out the stuff about Arrington, I was thinking to myself, what is the second biggest bicycle shed? What controversial but peripheral issue are people going to seize on now? Labor unions, probably. Ugh. After spending so much of yesterday arguing about whether people's dislike of Arrington was due purely to their high standards for journalistic integrity, or whether (this being the whole poin…
As mbrubeck said, I am not arguing about labor unions. I am arguing that your second paragraph does not offend labor union supporters because it says something different, and not because it says things at more length. Which contradicts your thesis that conciseness and politeness are at odds here.
To illustrate how different the two paragraphs are, the first paragraph could easily be a lead-in to an essay that argues that an environment that requires personal heroics from leaders drives away the dreck that are mismanaging labor unions today. This would be an example of the "sudden about face" that I referred to in my earlier response. The second paragraph could not be used to start that essay. Nor could the concise third version that I offered. The fact that one naturally leads to an argument that the other two do not proves their inequivalence.
That said, you're right that I was wrong to bluntly state that your first version said that labor unions weren't founded by heros. It says that anyone who claims that has difficult problem to explain, which leads people to conclude that they were not founded by heros. But doesn't state that conclusion. And, as I noted in my initial response, room has been left for solving the difficult problem instead.
Re: Persuade xor Discover
#114I really like th idea of writing to discover. Learning by discovery and exploration has been my education. It is also the way that I write - to explore, not to convince.
I hadn't been able to articulate this to myself coherently until I came across this on the Khosla Ventures site (complete with Vinod Khosla's notes such as "this is commie horse shit" and "MBA bullshit" (!).
http://www.khoslaventures.com/presentations/What_makes_entre...
Re: Persuade xor Discover
#115Re: Persuade xor Discover
#116"Most writers do. Most writers write to persuade, if only out of habit or politeness. But I don't write to persuade; I write to figure out. I write to persuade a hypothetical perfectly unbiased reader."
This is one of those pearls that makes reading Paul very satisfying. This inside view is vital when it comes to understanding people.
Why we write is essential to crafting the best version of a post/essay/article. I write for the most biased observer, myself. If I can respect the point and style of one of my posts, it gets published and the yardstick I measure content by does fluctuate daily.
When I cover a topic well, I can easily link back to that thought process within other posts to convey my ideas in a well thought out manner. Modularized web commenting if you like the concept allows for more rapid responses of higher quality to ongoing discussions.
The great part is, I can go back and update older concepts with a fresh perspective by writing follow on posts.
Re: Persuade xor Discover
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't have to make money from what you say to be a hypocrite. What Michael told me at TCC50 wasn't dishonest. If it had been, I'd have been upset. At an event like that, you're not going to ask exactly the same things you'd ask if a startup were actually pitching you. It's inevitably going to be somewhere between that and mere encouragement. Where between the two is simply a matter of convention. I had no idea wh…
You don't have to make money from what you say to be a hypocrite. Why? I'm criticizing him because he's a public figure and his words affect the daily lives and well-being of many people. My arguments in my original comment do not apply to the words of individuals in casual conversation, like the one we are having here. In fact, if we held ourselves to the same standards I'm demanding of Arrington, we'd hardly be abl…
Just needed to point out, risking being seen as a hypocrite is of greater value to shaking out the truth through varied perspectives than being paralyzed.
Valid points on TCs double faceted appearance (reminds me of nature vs demeanor). I still enjoy the heck out much of their articles. Specific authors usually mean more to me than the "brand".