Short Copy vs Long Copy: Settling the Debate

In the world of copywriting, people still debate how long copy should be in order to get maximum results.  While I prefer long copy myself and believe it works best, I think it's more important to focus on writing as much as it takes to say what you have to have say in order to get your prospective clients and customers to take action. You don't want to make your copy long for the sake of being long if it's not interesting or compelling. On the other hand, it shouldn't be too short either as it won't provide the information the buyer needs in order to make the decision.

David Garfinkel thinks he has settled the long copy vs the short copy debate once and for all. He gives an example of an ad for a job that a colleague of his wrote that was 461 words long! The response rate was impressive and David concludes that the debate is now closed on long vs short copy.

I disagree that the debate will now be over as too many people believe the myth that short is best and too much information is bad. However, I do agree with David on this:

How would those people know about this job if you didn't take the time ... and the words... to describe it to them in the first place?

Long, compelling copy fills in the blanks and leaves fewer questions in buyer's heads. If you can give them all the information they need to make a decision, there will be much less hesitation on your offer.