Please, Leave Out Defining Parentheticals If The Shortened Form Is Obvious

Last week's tip discussed the tedious practice of over-explaining shorthand names. It inspired a spirited discussion; so let's go a bit further; how often have you seen clunky sentences like this:

Ugh. Is it really necessary to tell the reader that future references to "Nike" mean "Nike, Inc." and future references to "plaintiff" mean the plaintiff? Probably not. A reader of average intelligence understands that without the obligatory defining parentheticals. So these parentheticals serve no purpose other than to clog the sentence and interfere with the writer's message. No rule of grammar or good sense mandates using such defining parentheticals either, so omit them where the shortened form is obvious.