[boveus]

I am not attempting to take a side in either direction here, but I noticed something interesting about the format of your reply in contrast with the person you're replying to. The person you were responding to broke their post up into paragraphs that were organized into sentences (sort of like you'd expect in a book). Your reply seems to be broken up into individual paragraphs that are >240 characters (coincidentally the same character limit as Tweets).

I don't mean this as an attack. It seems interesting to me that the way people can communicate in writing can be influenced by what type of media they consume.

[scotty79]

I'm quite aware of the differences in style. Style of the other person was so hard for me to parse that in order to respond I needed to reformat it into my style. Only then I could construct the response using my translation as reference.

I'm not quite sure that my style comes from the content I consume. I think I acquired it earlier, by doing math problems at school, by learning math in college and by learning programming. In all of those contexts I needed to extract meaningful stuff from all the baroque elements.

So I developed appreciacion for high ratios of important elements to fluff words and for writing that has clear, traceable backbone that has a point.

I think shortness of what I wrote is a result of my preferences not the key factor that shaped them. Best writing advice for clear communication is to write short sentences. Information split in short portions provides natural places to pause to appreciate it and is easily skimmable where you can skip sentences or paragraphs that you already understand to get a grasp of how they fit in the surrounding context.

This is btw not an endorsement of twitter which I personally hate and didn't manage to find a single reasonable use for it since its inception.