The big shots

[Ben Finney]

castironpi at gmail.com writes:

> On Feb 20, 6:02 pm, Ben Finney <bignose+hates-s... at benfinney.id.au>
> wrote:
> > For what it's worth, I've found none of your threads in the last
> > few weeks to make much sense at all, because of unclear and
> > incoherent writing. On that basis, I dismiss them before trying to
> > re-read them, because I don't want to spend my time trying to find
> > sense in them that may not be there at all.
> 
> How do I "bake" this idea? [loads of further verbiage apparently
> nothing to do with what Ben Finney wrote]

Here's another example of the above point. I've no idea what the
context is supposed to be of all the stuff you just wrote in your
message. It's also written in a fractured style that makes it very
difficult to follow. Hence, I tune out.

> Are further problems a) miscommunication or b) absence of content?
> If Holden and Genellina don't follow, that's a strong sign that the
> structure of my proposals is really bad, even if there's a good
> thing behind it. You just have to solve (a) before you solve (b),
> which makes devoting resources to (a) a little preliminary.

Agreed. I'll wait until you have better results from improving
communication before I devote further resources to your messages.

-- 
 \          "It's a good thing we have gravity or else when birds died |
  `\             they'd just stay right up there. Hunters would be all |
_o__)                                     confused."  -- Steven Wright |
Ben Finney