I have a terrible confession to make

[swingline]

Another 1,200 to 1,300 words today in three more blogs (BLOGS!). I'll finish that topic with two more tomorrow and then work on my freelance story. Although that one is due Monday, I need to have it sent to the editor by Friday because this weekend is my sixth anniversary and we're going out of town.

 

[typefitter]

Just arrived at the coffee shop, sitting at 37,390 words. If I can get to 38,000 today, I'm more than two weeks ahead of pace. WOOT TO THE WOOT.

 

[typefitter]

38,042. I'm taking the rest of the day off.

 

[TyWebb]

38,042. I'm taking the rest of the day off.

Go find a hooker and relax.

 

[typefitter]

Go find a hooker and relax.

I was actually thinking of going to Romania. Same thing, right, @YankeeFan?

 

[YankeeFan]

I was actually thinking of going to Romania. Same thing, right, @YankeeFan?

You're so easy to read.

 

[typefitter]

You're so easy to read.

Nothing's easy for you to read, buddy.

 

[YankeeFan]

Nothing's easy for you to read, buddy.

And yet...

 

[TyWebb]

You're so easy to read.

Well, he's a writer, so ...

 

[typefitter]

Well, he's a writer, so ...

The first rule of writing: No speed bumps.

 

[Dick Whitman]

The first rule of writing: No speed bumps.

This approach is a big reason why my legal briefs are typically light years ahead of my competition's. (Also, because I'm honest and don't misrepresent cases and law, but I digress.)

I really take pains to walk judges through the point I'm making - I'm one of the few people I know who will include, for example, tables and charts to visually show why cases are distinct.

Sorry for the threadjack, but "speed bumps" are a huge issue in this kind of writing. I read so many paragraphs where I think, "What the fork did they just try to say?" And I'm familiar with the case, not a judge coming upon it as one of 30 briefs he or she will read today.

Anyway, no speed bumps. Amen.

 

[typefitter]

This approach is a big reason why my legal briefs are typically light years ahead of my competition's. (Also, because I'm honest and don't misrepresent cases and law, but I digress.)

I really take pains to walk judges through the point I'm making - I'm one of the few people I know who will include, for example, tables and charts to visually show why cases are distinct.

Sorry for the threadjack, but "speed bumps" are a huge issue in this kind of writing. I read so many paragraphs where I think, "What the fork did they just try to say?" And I'm familiar with the case, not a judge coming upon it as one of 30 briefs he or she will read today.

Anyway, no speed bumps. Amen.

There are certain writers who are expert at making sure readers never trip. Bill Bryson comes to mind. He can take pretty complicated material and present it in such a way that you just go with it. Clarity isn't as heralded as it should be.