introvenk Diagnosing Drafts
Overview
A diagnostic checklist for finding reader-facing problems in an existing draft. Diagnose and suggest — name the problem, offer a concrete fix, let the author decide whether to take it.
Procedure
- Meaning ratio pass — meaningful words ÷ total words. Under 70% is bullshit territory, 80%+ is readable. Judge contextually, don't compute mechanically. See
meaning-ratio.mdfor the method and a worked example. - Technique checks — passive voice (the zombies test: can you insert "by zombies" after the verb?), jargon, hedging, buried lead, unsourced numbers, missing structure.
- Reader simulation — after reading, can you say what the point is, why it matters, and what you're supposed to do?
- Report as reader problems, not style preferences — say "I don't know what you want me to do here," never "I don't like this sentence."
- Criticize the prose, never the person.
Nuances, as tests not caveats
| Nuance | Test |
|---|---|
| Weasel words aren't a banned list | Deletion test — remove the qualifier; if the sentence becomes false, it was carrying meaning |
| Directness ≠ harshness | Target test — does the sentence criticize the work, or the person? |
| Clarity ≠ boring | Flatness check — did sentence-length variation and direct address survive editing? |
| Jargon is audience-dependent | Reader test — does this term save words for this reader, or gatekeep? |
Apply each test to the specific sentence in question — don't apply it as a blanket rule to the whole document.