A proposed compromise
I too like fact-laden nodes. They're useful, and bring E2 one step closer to being the mass sum of human knowledge with every submission. They make E2 worth searching for knowledge!
However, it does sadden me when an entirely factual node I spent a good while researching (so as to be accurate) and wording (so as to be less dry and able to stick in the mind easier) but no less true for either activity gets modded down.1
Is it because the voter did not like the subject matter at hand? Is it because my particular style of speech ( or manner of writing as it were) did not agree with said fellow noder? Is it because that node, for once, did not have clever witticisms strewn about, as the above noders have suggested be the case?
I cannot help the first two instances I proposed, but if the debate is to be cut and dry factual over wet humorous2, why not compromise and have both? Have the body of your text be straightforward and full of nice, shiny facts, and keep the majority of the wit and humor intended to keep your level high and your XP higher, not to mention your readership pleased, contained within footnotes3.
Footnotes can very effectivly seperate straightforward facts and personal opinion, thereby producing a informative node that pleases the kids to boot. I tend to use footnotes a bit, because they're also good for shoving in tangental thoughts that might not really be strong enough to carry a node by themselves.
So, there it is, my small, but I believe potentially useful, compromise. Footnotes Take them as you will :)
1Which is not to say that every node I make is a paragon of noding virtues, but I have my good and my bad.
2 Get it?
cut and dry<->dry factual :: wet humorous
Ha. Ha ha. Right, nobody likes a SAT
english geek ;)
3Footnotes! Like this one! And like the ones in the long example I wroteup under (oddly enough) footnotes just to accompany this node. Hope this helps the community in general, even just a little :)