Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Fearless-Knee2008 OP t1_j5vvugc wrote

Reply to comment by East_Share_9406 in City Council Summary by Fearless-Knee2008

Thank you for the feedback, next one will definitely be better organized. Would you suggest reducing the amount of information, or just formatting it better?

6

East_Share_9406 t1_j5wve8o wrote

Hmm, well a lot of the info gets kind of repetitive. X group gets Y dollars from Z source, motion on subject Beta introduced by Representative Alpha. Why not make some tables, and then synthesize a summary of events of the week based on that? You could easily refer to the hard data as footnotes throughout.

I’m a technical scientist, and that is how I’d represent information that is as tedious as this if I was writing a report on it for my job. As a bonus, “refer to table 1” will be very accessible for scientific-minded bostonions.

9

[deleted] t1_j60161k wrote

[deleted]

1

FamousButNotReally t1_j6290x8 wrote

I disagree with his disagreement. I think the suggested format condenses the information and makes it easier to understand by cutting out the repetition. Plus, consider that reaching a far larger audience and informing them about city government (even if its in slightly less detail) is better than fully informing much less people.

2

ProofIllustrious327 t1_j63k0m1 wrote

It takes 5 minutes to read this. Not everything has to be in tiktok format to be effective.

1

FamousButNotReally t1_j63u8vc wrote

I read it. I know how long it takes. It's not that much of a read. I'm not saying it should be a TikTok grab your attention in 6 seconds and sell you a product format. But there is a better way to present the data without it being repetitive and artificially long.

Condensing something to make it easier to parse doesn't make the reader stupid, inattentive or make the text ineffective.

Rather than saying X paid Y for Z to happen like for line, tabulate it. Im not suggesting this to "pander" to the quick media consumption we have today but to make it more readable. The rest of the info (that isn't grant approvals) can go written as is and not be missed by people who skim read. (And I'd wager this info can be more important than grant approvals because it involves actual debated policy)

2

Fearless-Knee2008 OP t1_j69xulp wrote

These are all very good points, I'm really glad people care about these issues and took time to read it. I'm going to try to shorten some parts, prioritize the most important info, but make sure it's still thorough. Let me know if the next one's better or what I can still improve!

1