Part of being a good writer is getting your thoughts across without being too
wory, but sure .. absolutely, if you have more to say, impress me
QFT
Site activity, business and money has never been better, and I'm still loving what I do after 20 years
added
"Japan"
"If you're applying for multiple positions, you must include a writing sample for each, so we know you understand the tech"
Perhaps you meant to say 'wordy'? Fascinating opinion if so, given your reviews (specifically conclusions) are verbose to the point I wonder if most actually read them thoroughly (fairly certain they don't).
It's especially interesting when many aspects are copy/pasted across similar products, when perhaps those could be contained to the core product (MBA/NFE), with only new particulars for AIB models.
That said, I respect whatever you choose to do. I personally believe well-rounded context doesn't always fit on one line; a pre-set space (all the time), although I understand the desire for that to occur.
Could you consider a new (copy?) editor position as well?
I can't imagine finding enough new/pertinent topics (to others) that go into posting several articles per day, let-alone reiterating them in an all in an engaging way, but often feel I could improve them.
(I'd be open to proof-reading, if not help add some spice. Never with the intention to take control, just help articulate or perhaps fill in conceivable blind-spots/misconceptions that may occur).
I love the site and have appreciated/respected W1zard longer than some members of this site have been alive...I just give him a bit of a hard time occasionally to keep him honest and on his toes.
I truly think, and anyone that has been around as long as I have would almost-certainly agree, he was a pioneer in the space and continues to keep the 'old' spirit of written reviews and linkable charts alive...which is more appreciated than he can possibly imagine. Well, perhaps he can, given he says the site is (still) doing very well in a space that has largely migrated to Youtube (video) and other mediums. I believe it is sites like this one that prompted Gamers Nexus (et al) to re-enter the space by (once-again) making the information in their video reviews available in text format, for which I am also thankful.
Surviving, if not thriving through such a transition speaks volumes to the quality, and to the perseverance of people that frequent the site for that type of information and/or how it is conveyed.
-----
Over the years there have been many times positions like this have come up on this and other sites I have frequented (Anandtech in it's prime, Wccftech back when I frequented there before it became an overwhelming meme cesspool, Kotaku, etc.,), and I've long-held the position that it was my role to be the guy in the comments to fill in the gaps or add extra context; to question the authority and round out the picture of conceivable viewpoints on an issue. It's not with the goal to be a contrarian or rain on anyone's parade for which a product fills their budget/desire, but to allow someone that is writing a piece with a certain narrative to do so, while still showing there are other aspects/viewpoints to consider (or reasons products have certain limitations; hopefully so such obvious segmentation may be mitigated in the future) that can still be contained within the context of that review, article, or subject matter (in the comment section); often that others may think/feel but choose not to say or are afraid to share. My hope has always been to allow as much information to be available in one place as possible, which is why I appreciate there is a discussion post in every review. I feel I've played my role when something like
this occurs; people read the review and may or may not realistically want/need a $1000 pair of headphones, but may be interested in HFM. Because of that discussion some may now be aware/reminded there is a cheaper (~$300-400) set available that is very good, but that the manufacturer needs to work on an aspect of their design for certain models (as shown not only by my opinion and/or the editor/reviewer, but by others that agree and participate in the thread with similar concerns/solutions).
TBQH, though, there's never been a time I've more heavily considered applying for such a position. I feel I've banked enough years of experience/knowledge (some that others have yet to learn and other things people will never have to go through simply because things evolved before their interest in something and/or lifetime) that it could be helpful in helping people understand when certain things changed and why, and what improvements have or can still be made; the same goes wrt conceivable regression. Without going into a conceivable Jeff Goldsmith question nobody has asked, I used to spend the majority of my time in a job that confined me to a small area doing mostly-mindless repetitious work, which allowed me to consume a ton of information (through podcasts, music, etc) mentally, and then process that information and what I wanted to say about it while adjusting my required mood/mindset through different emotional aspects of what I listened to afterwards (music or types/ways of going about other discussion). After I left that position I've found myself a little aimless, and disappointed in myself wrt keeping that flow (I think I needed the structure). I can't think of many jobs that would allow me to multi-task in such a fashion; giving my body expected/required purpose while taking in information on something new (and conceivably inspirational) at the same time; actively doing something, learning something new, but also absorbing, contemplating, or repurposing aspects of that I've already learned/appreciated. Doing reviews/editorials may allow a similar type of flow, but I have always been unsure. On top of that, when the guy that goes against the grain, fills in the gaps, or says the unsaid becomes the grain or the creator of those gaps, can one expect another to fill THAT position? I don't know.
Putting a viewpoint out in an official capacity on something is also not quite the same as commenting or writing a blog; there is a requirement to be concise and for there to be a throughline; not go off on one or more tangents. A requirement of professionalism that can't come across as forceful (although that is sometimes required for action to be taken); lest you become shoe-horned into appearing aggressive or a shill if overly focused on one strength or weakness. There's a (personal) requirement of perfectionism/not forgetting something that would probably eat away at me (more than it already does when I choose to comment on something), let-alone worries of writing so much people wouldn't read it thoroughly-enough to absorb all aspects I feel important, although the fact you have focused on noting that there are others more familiar with the workflow available for advice is extremely appreciated...to whomever may end up with such a job. That thoughtfulness should ease some of those concerns to whomever may think to apply.
While I've never wanted clout (I care more about the issues/solutions and spread/sharing of ideas rather than their origin), there is something to be said about the people one appreciates and being able to personally relate that I've never been able to have. Sometimes I wish I did, but other times I feel it's important to not have that expectation of a certain demeanor or style which comes with such as a job.
Maybe I will apply for one of these jobs...someday. Until I can work up enough courage and relinquish enough self-doubt about becoming part of the machine, I shall continue to (thoughtfully) rage against it.
(See? That's 1000+ words; 700+ if you don't count the note to W1zard. I edited it so it's now ~900/1200+...I'm incorrigible when my edits are the desired size of a complete article.
)
Maybe I'll try to make some kind of an "application" happen.