[drewcoo]

> in no particular order …

And what follows is an ordered list. Of mostly unsubstantiated nonsense explained in bloated language. That opposite of what I'd expect from good tech writing.

Is this a satire? It feels like something out of McSweeney's.

[cedricd]

Thanks. I was thinking the same thing. The language is hard to read.

http://paulgraham.com/simply.html

[combatentropy]

> And what follows is an ordered list.

Isn't it just a numbered list? You can number things, but that doesn't mean it's in order of importance, just the order it popped into the writer's head.

> Of mostly unsubstantiated nonsense explained in bloated language. That opposite of what I'd expect from good tech writing.

I agree. At first I thought this was for "tech writing" in the sense of user manuals. But this is for journalists. And it's more just a vague rant.

[projektfu]

Most unordered lists like this should be numbered so you can later refer to the points by number.

[watwut]

Every list is ordered. "No particular order" means "dont think they are ordered by importance".

It is list of authors pet peeves, stuff he would like writers to follow. I did not found the language bloated, it was easy to understand.

[munificent]

The headline is confusing, but I think the author means advice for "people who write about technnology", not "technical writers" the profession. The second sentence is pretty clear on the intended audience.