Originally posted by Dopey
I beg to difer.
You:
A cat is stuck in a tree. Firefighters came to get him down but they failed.
Me:
A cat that belongs to Santa Clause is stuck on top of the green Christmas tree. Firefighters, who by the way were elves, came to get him down. While trying to get him down, the cat turned into a reindeer and flew away.
I will agree that your statement is better than "mine", but yours is longer because it includes valid information, not just repetitious fillers.
Good: A cat is stuck in a tree. Firefighters came to get him down but they failed.
Poor: A cat is stuck in a tree. Firefighters came to get the cat down from the tree that it was stuck in. The firefighters were unable to get the cat down from the tree that it was stuck in.
Both statements convey the same idea, except the "poor" example is lengthened by using repetitious filler words. Your example was a definite improvement on the original "A cat is stuck in a tree. Firefighters came to get him down but they failed." statement, but it was lengthened by using additional facts.
Edit: From my experience in college, professors will give you a better grade on a paper that is shorter than the minimum length but flows nicely and is not chock full of filler words, modified font, ect...except if you have a nazi for a teacher that only grades on length, not quality. (Thats what she said?)