Curious why people downvote this, if anyone wants to offer their perspective?
I like it a lot due to being very straightforward, well-argued (unless I'm missing something), and it seems very good for getting the attention of people like me. I'd be more likely to gloss over anything trying to use professionaleese to argue for the same main point. This type of writing strikes me as much more credibly communicating what the author actually believes and why they believe it, rather than trying to conform to organisational stakeholders or something.
If they aren't using caps, that effectively removes the confounding hypothesis that they wrote it with the motivation to impress their employers, the academy, or somesuch. It's a costly, credible signal.
Curious why people downvote this, if anyone wants to offer their perspective?
I like it a lot due to being very straightforward, well-argued (unless I'm missing something), and it seems very good for getting the attention of people like me. I'd be more likely to gloss over anything trying to use professionaleese to argue for the same main point. This type of writing strikes me as much more credibly communicating what the author actually believes and why they believe it, rather than trying to conform to organisational stakeholders or something.
If they aren't using caps, that effectively removes the confounding hypothesis that they wrote it with the motivation to impress their employers, the academy, or somesuch. It's a costly, credible signal.