zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. azorna+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-03-28 14:33:28
It's funny because from that diagram I really don't see any particular relationship between the shape and its content. You could draw a regular pyramid with three segments and write the same labels on it and it would make just as much sense to me.

If anything a regular pyramid makes more sense to me: you want the smallest/narrowest useful description at the top and then you gradually expand on it as you go down, providing more (wider) context and detail for the key information.

Edit: Of course, it's a widely used term and good to understand in that context; the Wikipedia link is useful.

replies(3): >>margin+l >>wonger+z2 >>kqr+TK
2. margin+l[view] [source] 2025-03-28 14:35:25
>>azorna+(OP)
Yeah, this seems to be true for most pyramid models. It's really annoying when you start to spot it.
3. wonger+z2[view] [source] 2025-03-28 14:47:08
>>azorna+(OP)
I think it's about laying foundations at the beginning, not the length of the text at the beginning. The first sentence/paragraph is the foundation of everything beneath it, whereas the base of a normal pyramid is the foundation of everything above it.
4. kqr+TK[view] [source] 2025-03-28 18:58:22
>>azorna+(OP)
> I really don't see any particular relationship between the shape and its content.

This is often the case with geometric metaphors. They catch on easily, but they rarely make a lot of sense on closer scrutiny.

[go to top]