[nawgz]

> People learn new facts about topics and change their minds all the time

I view it as inappropriate to put pen to paper to publish about something I've only put passing thought and research into, so this point is a bit facile.

> A 5 year old

This one even more so.

[codazoda]

I learn by writing about things in detail because it causes me to think through them. So, I’m the opposite, sometimes, where I write about things I’m not an expert in. I also publish a blog, so I do it in public fairly frequently.

[nawgz]

Right, and in such a context you know what you don't know, so you're not asserting facts (equivalently expressing opinions) that will change in the short or medium term because those things which are in flux can easily be pointed to as such.

This is really my point - "opinions changing" = initial conclusions were drawn with inappropriate extrapolation. Why would you write about things you hastily extrapolated and never verified?

[grvdrm]

Responding to two of your comments.

> I personally imagine for reading one's own writing, just like listening to my own singing, the exact "pain points" you feel would also be felt by any audience and therefore are the most valuable feedback you could possibly receive...

Curious if you've actually received the exact same feedback from someone else listening to you sing vs your own thinking? Realize that might just be a stylized example. But I'm a drummer, and over many years of playing in front of people I've observed that they didn't notice the "paint points" I noticed. Lots of these things are relative right?

> I view it as inappropriate to put pen to paper to publish about something I've only put passing thought and research into, so this point is a bit facile.

Do you draft while you think and research? What's your process?

[nawgz]

> Curious if you've actually received the exact same feedback from someone else listening to you sing vs your own thinking? Realize that might just be a stylized example

it's a stylized example, for noobs who find themselves offensive upon any listen-back. For example, the comment I'm responding to suggests "reading their own writing to be painful". This is clearly not performer-tier, which you clearly are talking about.

To flesh out the example, I was bad at singing initially. I could be in-tune in a certain range, maybe 1.5-2 octaves, but even then my timbre was off, my pronunciations were off, it was too shrill here and there, my range was limited, etc.. Easy things to figure out on your own; painful things to hear on playback.

Now, later, I have 3+ octave range, multiple tones I can accomplish, the ability to power voice / head voice / rasp / break / scream, so when I sing for people they are able to give me subjective feedback on my artistic expression rather than my technical shortcomings, so the feedback diverges from what I would think myself, which is fantastic.

My point is that you don't get to the "performer" stage where people critique your expression without getting to a stage where your own art/work is palatable to you yourself.

> Do you draft while you think and research? What's your process?

Yes, I write behind a main thesis statement, and I write a first draft and simultaneously I collect evidence for this point. if I come to some conflict in my readings, I let this fuel my learnings. I don't just brush it aside as confusing, and then publish my work, come back to the conflicting info in 6 months and realize my idiocy, and then be like "oh damn my opinion flip flopped again, oops".