I feel like this is what blogging is especially good for. You can clear out the awful stuff and then try to incrementally improve.
I would diametrically disagree with point #7—if you want to write well, you need to revise the hell out of it. I guess pick whose writing you like better, between me and the author, and take the corresponding advice.
My technique is Da Vinci method just collect / discover lot of shiny pieces. Then stitch them together later. Develop these pieces separately like colored glass pieces in a mosaic, sort of inversion of divide and conquer, collect and assemble.
I find that phrase very helpful, because usually when I write, the first draft is always a giant mess. But you're able to craft it and edit it the best way that you can. So you can push out what you think is good work, and continue to improve as you write more.
I find forum posts far, far less nerve-wracking than a blog post. For me, a forum post is almost like how the original article describes a chat: it feels closer to realtime, and feels easier, because it's just like playing a normal role in a conversation. It's normally a response to something, expecting a response.
A blog post feels closer to a formal publication, and I feel like they're more expected to stand on their own, without the justification and context helpfully provided by others' posts.
What struck me back then was he said in an interview that you need to go through at least a thousand sheets of paper before you start producing anything good.
As a high schooler dreading to write a 4 page report on the guy, a thousand pages sounded ludicrous.
each sentence should make sense based on every prior sentence. each sentence should be able to stand alone on its own sheet of paper.
write each sentence on a single sheet of paper.