Can a government report be too long

[warlocked]

So, I was watching Question Period ( Canada ) something that was given as an example for the legitimacy of environmental protection laws ( won't go into detail for sake of relevancy) was the reference of a 2000 page report. Now, as a person whom actually goes ahead to read legal scripts of bills it is in my own view that few people if anyone will be able to fully read a report exceeding ( by my own estimates) 700 pages. Few will read it to end, and of those that do skim reading becomes near necessary.

So in your opinion should there be a maximum length to any report / bill if it is to remain legitimate. Why or why not

[Darsithis]

I don't see a reason to. With an index you can always just go to the specific area of the report that you need.

[warlocked]

True, however when you consider that in many cases it can be divided into multiple reports, and for legislation just going to specific parts may leave open loopholes

[solvexx]

I don't see a reason to. With an index you can always just go to the specific area of the report that you need.

When you want a specific part of a report to reference you often have to go to several parts.
Like a poster above me mentioned you can not take a part of a report out of context because 99% of the time you will need to read the report as a whole to understand entirely and to leave yourself free of loop holes.

[Kujako]

Here in the US we dont read them, we just vote on the name (see the patriot act).

[Tinykong]

Here in the US we dont read them, we just vote on the name (see the patriot act).

Or the ACA.

[Deleted]

Here in the US we dont read them, we just vote on the name (see the patriot act).

Patriot act does sound kidda cool.

[Stir]

I'd say 500 pages is already stretching it.

The longer you make a report, the greater the chances are that nobody will read it, and if they do, the report will be filled with bureaucratic bullshit that beats about the bush and serves no other purpose than to confuse its readers.

A report should have a simple function: Concisely explain what you want, and why you want it. If you need to explain synergies, exponential effects and third-party events/effects/influences, you can explain in short, direct language, and use references (article, author, page number) for the entire overview.

Honestly: Most usually, the length of reports and such serves to make politicians do and say what you want, and prevent the general populace from reading into it and raising its voice. It's basically an elaborate way of hiding ones actual plans.

[skrump]

I find that in the U.S a single bill can have several hundred little stipulations and I find it unnecessary because good idea's get tossed out with the bad ones due to being part of the same legislation.


Hell it would be more efficient and far more beneficial for a government to pull individual idea's out of a hat and yay/nay them

[Ssith]

the bigger problem i have with government reports and laws is that they often contain significant tangents and/or unrelated content.

if you're doing a report on trees of the northeast, you need to define what you're considering "northeast" and stick to that. no going off and comparing them to arizona, for example.

if you're passing a traffic safety law, there should be nothing in there about deforestation.

they need to limit the scope of what reports and laws can contain to pertinent subject matter.

[breadisfunny]

anything more than 2000 is a bit excessive. otherwise not really. i've read novels that are 1000-1500 pages long in less than a week. it doesnt take that long to read that many pages.
its just that a lot of the time they DONT READ THEM.

[Stir]

anything more than 2000 is a bit excessive. otherwise not really. i've read novels that are 1000-1500 pages long in less than a week. it doesnt take that long to read that many pages.
its just that a lot of the time they DONT READ THEM.

Novels are easy. They have cadence, rhythm, and you WANT to read them.
Official documents and reports tend to be musty, slow, dreary, packed with bull-shit terminology such as:
http://www.jurgensland.nl/download/adviesmatrix.pdf
Well; you probably won't be able to read it, but if you take one column from the first vertical row, and combine it with one from the second and so on and so on, you've got a perfectly valid Dutch bullshit line that serves only to fill space and confuse.

Honestly: If you had ever worked your way through these bloody things, you'd probably understand how incredibly tedious it is to filter everything. Most sentences need to be read attentively at least three times for them to make sense in context, synergies between sentences and paragraphs spanning entire chapters need to be explored and cross-referenced...
You cannot compare it to idly reading a fun novel.

[Adam Jensen]

anything more than 2000 is a bit excessive. otherwise not really. i've read novels that are 1000-1500 pages long in less than a week. it doesnt take that long to read that many pages.
its just that a lot of the time they DONT READ THEM.

I can read a novel just fine.

Get past 5 pages on anything dry or technical and I lose my mind. Even the 7110.65 for Air Traffic Control was a bitch to stay focused on.

---------- Post added 2013-03-22 at 02:02 AM ----------

I would say keep reports under 500 pages unless absolutely necessary.