That doesn't really excuse the strange acerbic brevity [that] I and most of my peers default to when writing technical documentation.
That doesn't really excuse the strange acerbic brevity [that] I and most of my peers default to when writing technical documentation.
I like the term acerbic brevity! Generally though, I'd say concise and precise is exactly what I want in my docs, especially if I have to read hundreds of pages.
There's a fine line to walk for it to stay understandable though.
Academic papers sometimes take brevity to the extreme due to page limits and (frankly) bad writers, so much so that crucial parts are missing or ambiguous or where papers consist solely of formulas with little context.
Personally I draw the line where I need start writing down stuff in order to understand the following paragraphs. That's tedious.
However I encountered the other extreme too and it's similarly unbearable: full on conversational English in an overly friendly tone with everything explained at length and sometimes repeated. It gets old really quick and takes longer to get to what I need. Fine for a hobby project, but if I need it for work I don't want to spend time on that.
It's impatience and tiredness.
Taking an idea, and converting it into code is a lot of work. Taking that same idea and then taking the code and turning the both into words that can communicate the original idea is just another complex task. I'd wager that the dopamine hit of getting stuff working has worn off and most people are writing doco when they're exhausted from their recent work.
Conciseness is a feature.
So is thoroughness, you have to strike a balance.