Principle One: Prefer the active voice.

["Fossil content was determined by the point count method." vs. "We determined fossil content by the point count method."]

Principle Two: Don't make nouns out of good, strong "working verbs" (e.g. avoid abstract nouns with endings like -ance, -tion, -ization).

["Determination of the fossil content was by the point count method." vs. "We determined fossil content by the point count method."]

Principle Three: Don't use unnecessary words -- be concise. Avoid both wordiness and redundancy. Try to keep your average sentence length under 20 words.

["In reaching the decision to discard the existing data sets, we concluded that the methodology was flawed due to an unrecognized sampling error."  vs. "We discarded our data due to a sampling error."]

Principle Four: Use concrete terms and ideas, rather than generalizations or abstractions -- be specific.

["An appropriate sampling method will be selected based on a variety of parameters." vs. "When we visit the outcrop we will have a better idea of which sampling method to use."] ["During process implementation, select factors will be observed to determine the efficacy of the procedure." vs. "During sample processing, we will check how well the crusher is pulverizing the rocks."]

Principle Five: Related sentence elements should occur together; unrelated sentence elements should be separated. Modifiers should be placed as close as possible to the word(s) they modify.

["Everyday we almost sampled an outcrop." vs. "Almost everday we sampled an outcrop."]

Principle Six: Avoid unnecessary shifts in number, subject, tense, or voice.

["Everyone should examine their outcrop now." vs. "You should now examine your outcrop."]; ["When the sediments were deposited, they fall through the water column." vs. "When deposited, sediments fall through the water column."];
["When we study an outcrop, samples are collected randomly." vs. "When studying an outcrop, we collect samples randomly."]
["According to our studies, the sample from this batholith contained abundant iridium." vs.  "Our tests show that this rock is rich in iridium."]

Principle Seven: Choose the "right" word; be simple, precise, and accurate in your wording.  Avoid unnecessary jargon.

["We took grab samples at intervals of 1 m, but superseded the interval wherever weathering threatened to adversely affect the integrity of samples."  vs. "We  sampled at intervals of 1 m, but changed the interval wherever weathering jeopardized sample quality." ]

["The effect of not considering fluid viscosity under conditions of diffuse non-laminar flow within an anisotropic, inhomogenous medium negated the validity of our research." vs. "We chose inappropriate test conditions."]

Principle Eight: Don't repeat a word or phrase when it is unnecessary, but don't lose accuracy or clarity just to avoid repetition.

["We began by taking grab samples at sampling intervals of 1 m, but changed sample spacing where weathering jeopardized sample quality." vs. "We took grab samples at intervals of 1 m, but changed the interval wherever weathering jeopardized sample quality."]

Principle Nine: Thoughts that are parallel should be expressed in parallel form. Thoughts that are NOT parallel should NOT be written in parallel form.

{"Sampling of outcrops: [a] was performed using a Jacobs staff, [b] using a Brunton compass,
[c] with a hammer and case-hardened chisel."}

vs.

{"We sampled outcrops using: [a] a Jacobs staff, [b] a Brunton compass, [c] a hammer and case-hardened chisel."}

["They began to work using the autosampler and to measure specific gravities. vs.
They began by using the autosampler and by measuring specific gravities."]

Principle Ten: Explain material starting with the most simplistic and most widely known concepts first, then slowly present more challenging material one step at a time. Do NOT skip steps; do NOT assume that your audience can "follow your thinking."

[Hopefully, this requires no example to understand.]
 

Modified from J. D. Bates, 2000, Writing with precision: How to write so you cannot possibly be misunderstood: New York, Penguin Books, 322 p.