There’s something really interesting about writing from people who haven’t ‘done the thing’, versus writing from people who have attempted to put a thing to practice: writing from practice is usually simpler; it tends to reduce the practical idea down to its most critical details.
Whereas writing from people who haven’t ‘done the thing’ is often unnecessarily verbose and ‘complete’, paying attention to all parts equally, since the author feels the need to compensate.
To be clear, I see this in my own writing as well.
I often publish a post with “here’s an overlooked idea that I’ve discovered” and then many months later can finally say “ok I’ve put it to practice on my business/career and here’s what I found”, and consistently the latter piece is more distilled and concrete and focused in a way that the earlier one isn’t.
@cedricchin Interesting. I see this on my writing, but it's not about if I've done the thing, but if I am fairly confident the people I'm writing for are close to doing the thing (or have, in which case, why am I writing?).
If I know that is the case, I can skip ahead, disregard intermediate steps. If I don't, then I need to be more verbose and explain the intermediate steps.
Florian
Cedric Chin
Ricardo J. Méndez