Words matter.

I want to write better descriptions. For example, when I wrote

...treating it as the kind of fact that always has been...

the "kind of" was kind of weak. I changed it to "sort of" but that was sort of weak, too. And they were both ambiguous: Did they mean "actually quite" or did they specify a type of fact? I went back-and-forth between kind of and sort of a few times, then suddenly settled on type of:

...treating it as the type of fact that always has been...

John Madden used to talk about "the red zone". And then everybody was talking about "the red zone". Except one announcer, who kept talking about "the red area".

It was just so wrong.

Area is a soft and squishy word with too many syllables. Too many vowels for football. Zone is a fast word, one syllable: you're in, you're out. It's perfect for the game.

Word Jumble (2): Parentheses as a formatting tool

Given this sentence:

"I'd rather have it and not need it than not have it and need it."

This is better, I think:

"I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it."

The first one is the way it comes out of my head. The second one is from a practical person I know, who probably never thinks about writing or organizing his words.

I compare having to not having. That's my style of logic.

The practical guy compares having to needing. That's clarity.


If it was just "having" versus "not having" that would be fine. But it's "having (and not needing)" and the alternative.

"Not" is a complication. It requires the reader to interrupt himself to do a logical test. It's better to put the "not" off to the end, where it becomes less important.

I'd rather have it (and not need it) than not have it (and need it).

Oh my god it came out that way again! But yeah, with parentheses it is easier to see the better form:

I'd rather have it (and not need it) than need it (and not have it).