[@pugbutter] I was under the impression this was a group discussion, much less us answering Haley's question on a 1-on-1 basis. Fact of the matter is that you're putting forth ideas that are so mind numbingly basic that I'm surprised someone of your calibre would even feel the need to point them out. I'm also not really sure what 'those (things?)' are that Haley agreed to. I never agreed to anything, however, and that's why I commented on your post.

It's similar to Tex's whole 'I can reduce advanced posts to 1 or 2 paragraphs without losing the core essence' which is equally missing the point as 'advanced posts are a lot of fluff' because this is not a thing I perceive as something inherent to advanced, or even limited to advanced -- I've hosted more than enough casual RP's, and if we wanna talk about fluff, we might as well talk about casual. The part that makes me feel like you're just saying 'bad writing is bad writing' however is when you say:

[quote]Details are bad if they're not, minimally, inspiring a sense of awe for this fictional place and its inhabitants, and ideally also developing characters; forwarding a plot; creating themes, symbols, and imagery; establishing a narrative tone.[/quote]

So, I will summarize what you said here in the way I read it, but I'm quite sure I captured the essence of what you meant. You are saying that if details do not perform the minimal thing details are written into the story for, they are bad. Hmmkay. Turn that any one way, you could make a similar blanket statement about any of the subsections.

Writing in flashy combat moves in arena is bad if they do not minimally inspire a sense of awe for the combatant, and ideally, forward the fight, create a persona, etc.

Writing in no details at all for the sake of minimalism is bad if this does not, minimally, make reading the post easier for the reader, or reduce visual clutter, etc.

They all come down to one core thing; "if the thing you do does not accomplish the goal of the thing you do, it's not done good," which isn't really an interesting point to me. Besides that, the beauty of it is that all these things are subjective as hell and what would not inspire a sense of awe for you could theoretically inspire a sense of awe for me. 

Tex's 'game' of reducing advanced fluffy posts to a few paragraphs.. is then a magnificent WOOSH at the very least but in my humble opinion not much more than a blanket position on writing that he and seemingly you(?) take that lacks much more depth than 'many words for purpose of words are bad, ugg ugg huh huh'. And in my very subjective eyes, it makes you seem a little out of touch with writing, and perhaps a tad elitist. :rolleyes "I can write what you write in less words." I'm sure you can, but I'd probably enjoy reading it less.