Occasionally I get e-mails that don’t criticize the content of my web pages, but instead focus on my perceived failings as a writer. On the one hand, I’m never too sure how much credence to put into criticism that rarely goes deeper than “you suck,” but on the other hand I have spent a lot of time thinking about writing and the web, especially when it comes to issues of quantity vs. quality of writing.
In that debate I definitely come down on the quantity side. I worry a lot about any possible errors in logic or facts, but typographical errors or sentences that could be constructed better don’t really worry me very much. For awhile, I sent freelance op-ed columns to the Detroit News. They published the columns, sent me a check, and the editor I dealt with said very kind things about the quality of my writing. But behind the scenes, each of the columns I submitted to him went through 8 to 9 drafts minimum before I dared send them to him. I’d easily spend 10 to 15 hours over a weekend on a single 500 word article, making sure each word did exactly what was needed — no more and no less.
Eventually, if my sites continue to be successful, I’ll get to quit my day job and devote more time to quality control, but for the moment I’m more interested in getting my ideas out there rather than making sure everything is picture perfect. The one thing I do to compensate for this is on a monthly basis I go back and re-read what I’ve written that month, editing it for punctuation, grammar, spelling, and sentence construction. I think that’s a pretty good compromise.