[Foundation-l] elections

Anthony wikilegal at inbox.org
Sun Apr 8 12:51:45 UTC 2007

On 4/7/07, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> Longe statements written in Englishe are bad even if you do not
> considere translacioun.
> You always run the risk of tl;dr. While obviously some voters are
> going to be all enthusiastic and willing to read anything you write, I
> think the majority is going to have the type of mentality where they
> do respond to long statements with a hearty "tl;dr".
That's why you should write in a way that starts out general and then
gets more specific.  Short attention spanners can read the first
paragraph; most people can read the first two or three; and then those
with too much time on their hands can read everything.  Or even a
single person might read one paragraph for one candidate (and get
turned off by it) and several paragraphs for another candidate (who
eventually gets eir vote).

One size fits all doesn't seem at all appropriate here.  Translators
obviously have to draw the line at how much their willing to
translate, and a simple rule (we'll only translate the *first* 150
words) seems fair to all.  But telling people to just shut up
altogether after such a short statement doesn't make any sense.  IMO.

This response is 145 words long.  Or so.


More information about the foundation-l mailing list