Explaining is a subtraction problem. The subject has forty different concepts. Your reader can hold four at a time. It’s about deciding which four of the subject to present, and being prepared to say something slightly less complex than the actual truth in order to get your reader to the point where they can understand the actual truth.
There is wonderful intricacy in forgetting what it is like not to know. This is why many experts fail to explain. Answers to this question must be at least 40 words Answer this question to receive valuable feedback from your instructor. Answers must be submitted in text format.
An explainer is written for a particular audience with a particular known gap. If the audience is average, then the text is written for the audience as if they were average, which produces the definition-by-restatement problem. This happens when the writer explains the term with three other terms that the audience also doesn’t know. The audience feels like this is no help and it puts them exactly where they started.
Generated explainers do not explain, they merely restate. They use the same vocabulary as the term being defined and then provide context, assuming the very thing the reader hoped to learn. There is nothing inherently wrong with what they say which means that no one catches that it is a poor explanation. The reader then leaves as uninformed as they were before.
We ask who will read this and what they will do with the answer because an explainer for a journalist and one for a customer differ in everything but the topic. The writer merely has to read until they can explain the topic without the use of notes, and at this point, simplification is safe to do.
The explainer itself, a simpler working definition, and a breakdown of all the simplifications done by the writer, complete with the complex descriptions of each. This paragraph is essential when a more informed reader goes through the article and attempts to determine whether the simplifications were done with intent.
One rate, whatever the format: $10 per 100 words. You are paying for the writer’s time and judgement, so the price scales with the words rather than with a package tier.
| Typical explainer | Words | Writing | Fee (1%) | You pay |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short explainer | 600 | $60 | $0.60 | $60.60 |
| Standard explainer | 1,100 | $110 | $1.10 | $111.10 |
| In-depth explainer | 1,800 | $180 | $1.80 | $181.80 |
The writer receives 100% of the writing price. Our 1% fee is added on top of it, and 0.5% is donated to tree planting. Full pricing breakdown.
A named human writer with a background in this kind of work. No model drafts, outlines, edits or researches any part of it, and nothing is run through an AI humanizer. Every draft is checked against multiple detectors before it reaches you.
A named human writer with a background in this kind of work. No model drafts, outlines, edits or researches any part of it, and nothing is run through an AI humanizer. Every draft is checked against multiple detectors before it reaches you.
Every sentence containing a regulatory claim is highlighted, thus making it very easy for your compliance team to review them. While we do not verify compliance for you, nor will we bypass a review that you have not completed.
Each delivery provides a summary and the complete answer. So, your specialist only has to review a concise annotated list rather than re-read everything. Usually, where they disagree with a shortcut, the revision is only a paragraph and takes a day to complete.
Completely. Copyright transfers to you on delivery, with no attribution requirement and no licence back to us. Nothing written for you is resold, repurposed or republished.
Reviews from completed, paid orders in this category.
Savings explainers like to use analogies, and this one shows us a table with two worked examples. Our compliance reviewer passed it with zero comments for the first time in the four years I have been here. This must be a first for them also. (I have never actually read a savings explainer.)
Good job overall. The opening analogy of our product being like a filing cabinet is probably going to be viewed as condescending to a bunch of engineers. I flagged that, and I got a different replacement for that opening analogy a couple of hours later. They kept all of the other text as is.
The quality I had no problems with. The timing was way off. I thought a 900 word how-to would show up in a day, and I had to use up the whole three days. My bad for not checking the delivery terms. There was one measurement that had to be fixed, and that one came back in a couple of hours.
We do not ask you to take the no-AI promise on trust. Each draft is run through these platforms and the reports are attached to your delivery email.
Originality.aiAI detection + plagiarism
GPTZeroAI detection
TurnitinAI detection + similarity
CopyleaksAI detection + plagiarism
Winston AIAI detection
ZeroGPTAI detection
SaplingAI detection
Content at ScaleAI detection
Send the brief, get a human draft back within 3 days. No account, no subscription, no AI.
$10 per 100 words · all of it to the writer · 0.5% to trees