Writing Standards
Voice
Write for your reader, not yourself. Say what you mean. Cut what you can.
What to Do This Week
Before publishing anything, check your writing against these three tests:
Can you cut a word?
If yes, cut it. Every word must earn its place.
Would your grandmother understand?
If not, simplify. Jargon obscures; plain language reveals.
Can someone act on this?
If not, add specifics. Vague advice helps no one.
These aren't style preferences. George Orwell argued that clarity is ethical—obscure writing enables obscure thinking. When you catch yourself reaching for jargon, pause. Ask what you actually mean. Say that instead.
How to Recognize Good Writing
Good writing recedes. You don't notice the prose—you understand the idea.
When writing works, it's transparent. When it breaks—when you catch yourself reaching for jargon—the writing becomes visible. That's your signal to transform it.
The Pattern
Notice when writing feels off → Transform it → Return to clarity.
Nicole Fenton and Kate Kiefer Lee call this "writing for your reader, not yourself." Show what works better. Meet readers where they are.
What the Resistance Sounds Like
Steven Pressfield named the internal force that fights against clear expression. Here's how it shows up in writing:
| You might think... | What's actually happening |
|---|---|
| "Use 'leverage'—it sounds professional" | Hiding behind jargon |
| "Keep it vague—you can't be wrong" | Avoiding commitment |
| "Add a clever metaphor" | Decorating instead of clarifying |
| "This philosophical reference shows depth" | Impressing instead of helping |
| "Success stories only—hide the failures" | Polishing instead of being honest |
When you catch yourself reaching for jargon, pause. That's your signal. Ask what you actually mean.
Five Principles
1. Clarity Over Cleverness
Write for your reader, not yourself.
You might reach for "leverage" because it sounds professional. You might add a clever metaphor hoping readers will be impressed.
Here's what works better: Code is read 10x more than written. Writing is read 100x more. Serve the reader.
| You might write | What serves readers better |
|---|---|
| "Significantly improved development velocity" | "Built in 6 hours vs 15-20 hours estimated (60-70% savings)" |
| "Leveraged cutting-edge AI capabilities" | "Used Claude Code for component generation" |
The test: Would your grandmother understand this sentence? If not, rewrite.
2. Specificity Over Generality
Show what you mean.
Vague claims feel safe—"significant improvement" can never be disproven. But readers can't act on vague. "26 hours vs 120 estimated" tells them something real.
Every claim can be measurable. Every metric can be precise. Specificity builds trust.
| You might write | What serves readers better |
|---|---|
| "Saved significant development time" | "26 hours actual vs 120 estimated" |
| "Many users benefited" | "47 active users across 12 organizations" |
| "Improved performance" | "Reduced load time from 3.2s to 0.8s (75%)" |
3. Honesty Over Polish
Document both successes and failures.
It's natural to want to look competent. Documenting failures feels vulnerable. But here's what readers actually need: they learn more from your failures than your successes.
Acknowledge limitations. Show where things went wrong. That honesty builds credibility.
Include: "What This Proves / What This Doesn't Prove" sections
Include: "Where User Intervention Was Needed" documentation
Include: Limitations acknowledged before conclusions
4. Useful Over Interesting
Help readers implement, not just understand.
Interesting ideas are appealing. Novel concepts feel important. But readers came to solve a problem. Can they implement this? Are prerequisites clear?
Every piece of content should answer: What can someone do with this?
Include: Reproducibility sections with starting prompts
Include: Expected challenges documented
Include: Prerequisites explicit before instructions
5. Grounded Over Trendy
Connect to timeless principles.
New frameworks arrive constantly. Yesterday's wisdom can feel obsolete. But trends come and go—principles endure.
Connect technical decisions to timeless principles. Cite masters. Show philosophical lineage. Dieter Rams' principles outlasted every design trend. Yours can too.
Example: "Given: Rams 'Good design is unobtrusive'"
Example: "Context: Tufte's principle of maximizing data-ink ratio"
Sentence Patterns
Short Declarative Statements
"This isn't minimalism for aesthetics. It's discipline for clarity."
"Less, but better."
"Decoration is dishonest."
Paired Constructions (What It Is / Isn't)
"Not blog posts about AI, but real data from building real systems"
"Not features for features' sake"
"Not interesting, not novel—useful"
Em-Dash for Emphasis
"Built in 6 hours — 65% faster than manual development"
"These aren't experiments — they're business-critical infrastructure"
"Research papers with tracked experiments — not just blog posts"
Interrogative (Questions That Interrogate)
"Is my design good design?"
"Does this meet Rams' principles?"
"What must remain?"
Required Elements for Experiments
Patterns to Transform
When you recognize these patterns in your writing, you can transform them.
Marketing Jargon
These words feel professional but communicate little. When you notice yourself reaching for them, ask: what do I actually mean?
Vague Claims
Vague claims feel safe—they can't be disproven. But they also can't help readers. Here's how to transform them into something actionable.
| You might write | What serves readers better |
|---|---|
| "Significantly improved performance" | "Reduced load time from 3.2s to 0.8s (75%)" |
| "Many users benefited" | "47 active users across 12 organizations" |
Decoration
Every element should earn its existence. When something exists for "visual interest" rather than function, readers feel the emptiness beneath.
No emoji (unless terminal aesthetic like ✅/❌ for status)
No stock photos for visual interest
No color accents for "brand personality"
Every element must justify its existence
Voice Checklist
Before publishing any content, verify:
Preferred Terminology
AI Development
Use: "AI-native development" (not "AI-assisted" or "AI-powered")
Use: "Agentic systems" (not "AI agents" alone)
Use: "Claude Code" (specific tool, not generic "AI")
Use: "Working with AI agents as development partners" (not "using AI")
Research
Use: "Experiments" (not "projects" or "case studies")
Use: "Papers" (not "blog posts" or "articles")
Use: "Tracked experiments" (emphasis on measurement)
Use: "Reproducible results" (not "findings")
Use: "Rigorous methodology" (not "best practices")
Quality
Use: "Production-ready" (not "functional" or "working")
Use: "Business-critical infrastructure" (not "enterprise solution")
Use: "Systems thinking" (not "best practices")
Use: "Canonical standards" (not "style guide")
Philosophy
Use: "Less, but better" (always this phrase)
Use: "Weniger, aber besser" (German original for formal contexts)
Use: "Modes of Being" (not "properties" or "websites")
Use: "The Canon" (capitalized, sacred)
Use: "Masters" (not "influences" or "inspiration")
When Specificity Is Constrained
Client confidentiality does not excuse vagueness—it redirects it.
When outcomes are under NDA, specify what you can share. Acknowledge what you cannot.
Instead of vague claims:
Required: Always include at least one measurable metric.
If outcomes are confidential, measure inputs:
- • Development hours
- • Lines of code changed
- • API integrations count
- • Deployment infrastructure details
Never acceptable: Vague claims without ANY specificity.
Educational Voice
Teaching follows the same five principles with additional patterns for progressive disclosure.
Progressive Disclosure
Reveal complexity in layers. Each layer must earn its existence.
Situation → Task → Notice
"You're building X. Your task is Y. Notice Z."
Discovery → Why It Matters
"result.error is an object. Structured errors enable..."
Pattern → Canon Connection
"AbortController with cleanup. Principle 7: long-lasting."
Scaffolding Markers
Use explicit markers for meta-learning:
- Notice: Direct attention to a specific observation
- Discovery: Reveal what was learned
- Why it matters: Connect to broader principle
- Reference: Cite canonical source
What We Avoid in Teaching
"Simply do X" — Nothing is simple to the learner
"Obviously" — If obvious, why say it?
"Clearly" — Clarity is earned, not declared
Step-by-step without context — Recipes without understanding
The Hermeneutic Test
Every piece of content must pass the hermeneutic circle. This is our quality control:
Does this part reveal the whole?
Does this experiment embody "less, but better"? Can someone read this and understand what CREATE SOMETHING stands for?
Does the whole explain this part?
Can you trace this decision to a canonical principle? Does this connect to .ltd standards?
Does this strengthen the circle?
Does it feed back to validate or evolve the canon? Does it make the ecosystem more coherent?
If any answer is "no," revise or reject. The circle is our competitive advantage.
The Lineage
CREATE SOMETHING's intellectual foundations span philosophy, writing, and systems. Each discipline has a three-layer genealogy:
| Layer | Philosophy | Writing | Systems |
|---|---|---|---|
| Foundational | Heidegger | Orwell | Wiener |
| Methodological | Gadamer | Zinsser | Meadows |
| Applied | Rams | Fenton/Lee | Senge |
Foundational works reveal hidden structure. Methodological works make it teachable. Applied works demonstrate practice in specific domains.
How the Masters Wrote
Our voice is isomorphic to our principles—the form matches the content. This is how the masters wrote:
Foundational
George Orwell
Clarity as ethics. Obscurity as political evasion. Six pages that changed everything.
"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable."
"If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out."
Methodological
William Zinsser
Accessible methodology. Makes clarity teachable. The practitioner's bridge.
"Clutter is the disease of American writing."
"Writing is thinking on paper."
Applied
Nicole Fenton & Kate Kiefer Lee
Transformation examples. User-centered clarity. Practical warmth.
"Write for your reader, not yourself."
"Show what to do, not just what to avoid."
Systems
Donella Meadows
Stocks, flows, leverage points. Makes systems visible to practitioners.
"We can't control systems or figure them out. But we can dance with them."
Design
Dieter Rams
Declarative principles. No fluff. Compressed wisdom.
"Good design is as little design as possible."
Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
Aphoristic. Architectural. Essential.
"Less is more."
"God is in the details."
Edward Tufte
Empirical descriptions paired with visual proof. High data density.
"Above all else show the data."
Charles and Ray Eames
Functional elegance. Every word serves the reader.
"The best for the most for the least."
We don't imitate their style. We enact the same discipline that produced their style. Writing that emerges from "weniger, aber besser" sounds like this because it must.
This is not a brand guideline.
Brand guidelines are static rules. This is a living interpretive framework. The voice evolves through the hermeneutic circle—slowly, carefully, through validation in real-world practice.
Protect the circle. Trust the circle. Let the circle refine itself.