Clojurians Log v2

I've thought a lot about this blog post ever since I first read it. https://www.evalapply.org/tags/notebooks/index.html @adityaathalye I definitely think that is true to an extent… not all thinking is writing but writing certainly involves so much thinking, both during and before and after you actually write.

People should feel able to have their own voice when it comes to writing. They should also enjoy how they write. Its much harder to keep writing when they dont. When writing commercially (financial or social), then there are more constraints needed to be 'successful', ensuring the audience values the content. Writing for yourself allows much greater lattitude, although a person can be their own worst critic. I am quite verbose and free thinking when I initially write something. Then I refine the words and structure to ensure the intended audience can easily consume the messages I want to convey. I have even refactored posts on Slack several times, to ensure they are meaningful. My best recieved writing has usually been refactored several times. Being consise, meaningful and engaging all at the same time is a skill to continually develop, a muscle that needs regular exercise.

When going off on a tangent, I see that as an opportunity for an additional article (blog post) or a separate page/chapter of a book. I will usually keep on writing on the same piece of work to stay in the flow, only separating the different aspects once the words have been captured.

@jr0cket I am curious how you judge for yourself which of your works are most well received? I think part of what prevents me from releasing things sometimes is that I don't know how to elicit helpful feedback because as someone with no real audience, it’s unlikely people comment on my work, and I don't like marketing/marketing myself… I've just never been good at that aspect of “getting my stuff out there”, and when I receive feedback it isn't usually very deep (examples include things like one word comments or just simple statements about how much they liked or disliked one thing). Also (btw I love your content) - for you in particular since you teach clojure, how do you judge how well people are understanding your content? It's one thing for people to like your content, but it seems harder to know if they are understanding what you are trying to say. Maybe it's for the same reasons as my original post here, but I often feel like I will say or write something which to me makes perfect sense, and the response that someone provides indicates (regardless of how well it was received) that they didn't really catch what I am trying to get across. On the one hand, I want to improve my communication and writing skills, but on the other I feel really tied to a juvenile through-composed approach to creation and I don't know if it's laziness or just something about how I operate. Almost like there is a certain ingenuine aspect to cleaning up my thought because it isn't really how I arrived at it, plus I don't actually speak cleanly or concisely at all even though it's a good trait.

Thank you for the shout-out, Melody. Brevity is not my strong suit either. But I let the text/thoughts arrive, as they arrive, and let the chips fall where they fall. As Bane said; now is not the time for fear, Doctor. That comes later. Or something... Anyway, where were we? Ah yes, there's more where that came from... https://www.evalapply.org/tags/writing/

As for tangents... That's what footnotes are for. My posts often have a 1:1 ratio of main text : footnotes text. Our blogs, our rules, I say.

@wistfulmelodylispfulp love your slop!

Great stuff

Always seems well thought out. Lot's of compulsive creativity around these parts of the internet/modern world

@wistfulmelodylispfulp quantitative feedback is relatively easy, as I've hooked up Google Analytics to each website. I can see which books and pages in those books are getting more attention. Videos are published via YouTube which also provides basic viewing analytics (in YouTube Studio). Quantitative feedback doesn't drive my writing, although it may have a minimal influence on content priorities (e.g. if I get a lot of hits on a subject then I may do more, assuming I feel more is needed). Qualitative feedback is of course much more valuable and far harder to obtain. I would rather have one useful comment on a blog post than all the analytics I can automatically gather 😄 When writing for a software development audience, the audience themselves is not necessarily adept at written communication, especially using a human language. Also everyone also has their own journey into the industry and their own set of experiences and biases along the way. So obtaining qualitative feedback is very challenging from a very broad audience like the Internet (even when writing about a niche topic). I have received very useful feedback when coaching people, usually 1-2-1 or in small groups. I learned a lot about introducing and getting people excited about Clojure by running in-person workshops between 2010 and 2019 (I ran a monthly workshop almost every month between 2012-2017), as well as the monthly London Clojurian dojo's I used to support. I also did 12 ClojureBride London events and learned a lot about teaching Clojure that were new to programming (or just learning their first language). When you are face to face with another person and they feel in a safe place to learn (e.g. they are asking questions), then you have a far better understanding of how well they are picking things up. However, this isn't necessarily going to work as well with the next person (or next group of people). Even with all that experience, there is no guarantee I make myself clear in any particular piece of writing. I certainly have some older writing that is not clear at all, even to me 🤣 I am often my strongest critic, but I try and be as nice and supportive about it, otherwise I am just being an ass to myself. My writing started as a way to support my own learning, so if it does not pass that test then it needs a refactor. The core principle I base all my writing on: It should be useful to me. Not every piece of writing needs to be stunning (just like not every piece of code is going to be awesome). Not everyone (or anyone) on the Internet will understand it or like it, and that's okay. It is perfectly fine to have most of your work be more like a stream of consciousness. That can be fun to read, especially with something like an experience report or sharing tales of woe/joy about your own career. People really enjoy stories with a personal element and it can make them feel more engaged with the writer. When you wish to teach something, then being very specific and detailed is more important (and not missing steps or letting the content become out of date - that can be a big challenge and takes time and 99% of the Internet gets wrong). Guides and tutorials tend to be less personal, as a technical audience wants to get to the point or get something working (especially technical people who are very busy/stressed). For example, the Arch Linux docs are incredibly detailed and you can learn about a huge amount of things. But if you just want to do task X, then it can be a huge chore to try and find the one piece of info that you need in all the options. An effective approach to improve communication through writing (or other media) is to have another person (or small circle of people) who actively gives you constructive feedback on drafts and content ideas in a timely manor. We all appreciate that having a responsive feedback cycle really helps with our Clojure work and unsurprisingly it works for writing too. There does need to be a good level of trust in this kind of relationship and a minimum level of commitment from those involved. It can feel like a constraint at times, but working within a constraint is a useful way to focus. The people giving you feedback need to understand and support your uniqueness of voice (and avoid turning you into AI slop or overly manufactured product). It can be useful to write about a similar topic in different ways. For example, I have a public journal that is very free-form, sharing my experiences of what I do each week. It is also a semi-organised dump of how (and why) I did something that week as it happens. The writing in the journal has no consideration as to if anyone understands it. The content in the journal can help shape and support clear and concise content for the books, by taking the writing and shaping it into communication. After writing for a decade and a half I worry less about what people think and focus on my own needs from writing (especially when I am not being paid to write). You cant please everyone all of the time and on the internet you can drive yourself crazy trying to please anyone at anytime 🤣 My DM is open if you are seeking more advice or moral/constructive support.

Handy since you can write “we need to move froward with this as quickly as possible” and then have plausible deniability.

jail

Come on, please be unfroward

what a fantastic bit of trivia