It seems unlikely that spending two orders of magnitude more time to make a decision would result in a better decision. This goes against the general consensus I've seen in business and public policy literature around for the value of extra decision time. If anything, more time results in worse, not better, decisions beyond the first hour (and often beyond the first minute for simple decisions!).

I often find long-form writing that is not brief is valuable for giving the reader time to digest ideas before you throw the next one at them. At least when I'm reading I like to have some filler between the ideas to give me time to digest a thought and get to the next one. If you take away the transitions, stories, and evidence that resides between compact insights you eliminate the opportunity to think while reading. This is why I'm often disappointed my own writing feels as dense as it does and I often try to work on making it less dense so the reader has more space to think before I throw the next context-laden sentence at them.