Replies Too Verbose

[Minuend]

(Side note: One thing I've noticed on this forum is people's propensity to use a lot of words, but actually say very little).

So are a lot of replies too verbose? If so, why? Is it a good thing or a less good thing?

I find my replies sometimes tend to become long. Part of the reason is I try to reply to objections that might come forth from my reply. So I attempt to counter objections before they are made.

I guess it's also somewhat difficult to predict what people will intuitively understand, so you might elaborate unnecessarily. Or perhaps it's just an inefficient way of translating thoughts to words?

In what ways do you find other members too verbose?
Why are you verbose?
Do you enjoy or dislike people who write long posts? (Perhaps it depends).

 

[TimeAsylums]

replies too verbose?

no

 

[Inquisitor]

Depends on the post.

 

[nanook]

This board is all about long posts, imho. It's how people show up as people and what makes this place interesting. But this doesn't mean i can handle reading lots and lots of posts from different people. I end up ignoring many individuals until i don't. I read superficially and when i reread while on psychedelic drugs i feel like i have overlooked the potential that is somebodies intelligence, because i had a preconceived notion of what intelligence could be useful to me and what they wrote was not a match. I feel partially sorry about not being able to connect with people more but the other part of my brain thinks: stop wasting your time with people from the other side of the planet, go and get laid.

 

[Puffy]

I like verbose replies, if they're well articulated and thoughtful, and agree that it's a part of what differentiates the atmosphere here. I'd rather write a detailed post and get one good response, than write a short one and get low-quality responses.

I'm generally just a long-form writer in that I need a fair amount of words to articulate something well. I aim to express a post in however many words it needs expressing, and for it to be well articulated. I'm sure I probably fail in that, however.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

I use a thesaurus/dictionary daily and try to use any word I find (or create) that fits, so that the neural pathways are forged and maintained and I remember and know more in the process of forming a post.

I tend to appreciate skillful word and sentence constructions, even to the point of redundant elaboration.

I consider myself an active student of english, despite maybe some relative mastery I've gathered so far.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

So are a lot of replies too verbose?...

No. Previous posters have already made mention of the reasons I would agree with. Its why this forum is refreshing.

Go for it INTPs. Screw all the naysayers.

 

[Urakro]

It depends, and sometimes not entirely with the poster or post. Sometimes, I'm just too exhausted. But there is a large handful of posters on here who can write long posts, and still keep me interested as I read word for word.

I know I've got a bad habit of repetitively using useless fillers such as "I guess, I think, actually, however, very, really, completely, etc". I overuse words, so if I get time to edit I'll either cut them out or find alternate synonyms.

I think words are like paint an artist would use on canvas.

 

[Cheeseumpuffs]

It depends how I'm feeling at the time. Sometimes I go into a thread and just can't be bothered to read the longer posts but other times I'm absolutely riveted.

As for reasons why some of my posts may become longer, as I write I tend to come up with like thirty addendums, corollaries, and counter-arguments for every thought I have and I just try to do the best to convey the whole picture of what's happening in my head.

But no, I don't think the forum is too verbose. Just my willingness to read them sometimes.(edit: ugh, this sentence is dumbly worded. Whatever)

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

I think words are like paint an artist would use on canvas.

This

 

[Haim]

No. Previous posters have already made mention of the reasons I would agree with. Its why this forum is refreshing.

Go for it INTPs. Screw all the naysayers.

The problem isn't that they are long,it is that they are unnecessary long,yes it is good that you can almost properly convey your ideas,but writing 20 lines for what can be said in 5 lines is wasting the reader's(which is less likely to not skip it) time(and writer),these unnecessary long posts have meaningless garbage.Write 200 lines but keep them all meaningful.
I try to keep express my ideas as a simple product,does it make my posts hard to understand?
Maybe that is something that I develop for talking purposes or/and to make good code.Short so I can tell everything I want,simple so that they understand(which they don't) and because I forget what I want to say fast.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

The problem isn't that they are long,it is that they are unnecessary long,yes it is good that you can almost properly convey your ideas,but writing 20 lines for what can be said in 5 lines is wasting the reader's(which is less likely to not skip it) time(and writer),these unnecessary long posts have meaningless garbage.
I try to keep express my ideas as a simple product,does it make my posts hard to understand?
Maybe that is something that I develop for talking purposes or/and to make good code.Short so I can tell everything I want,simple so that they understand(which they don't) and because I forget what I want to say fast.

Your posts suck in my opinion. I don't think they are written well. I skip yours. Normally I wouldn't be so blunt and make such a statement personal but because of the nature of this thread and the particular nature of your opinion on the matter and the fact that your posts are particularly atrocious as far as context and communication I'm compelled to point out that you are not a good one to give advice on this topic.

 

[chlywly]

When I was younger I used to wax eloquent, over the years I have come to realize that it's much harder to say something in a short, simple and succinct fashion than it is to say something using what one might call "flowery" language.

 

[Sir Eus Lee]

I don't really attach what people are posting to their posts. I do to get a sense of that person, but I read the posts to get a sense of the thread.

I agree with the enthralled or bored statements previously said.

I read all the posts in this thread before critiquing my standards for whether a post is readable, so in this case it doesn't matter.

I think it depends on content, but definitely on clarity also. If I can't understand the words you use for your idea, it doesn't matter how amazing it is. Communication is for others to take in, not always for you to give out.

I skip over posts and threads I find boring. I think I have an interested-meter and so if the general thread sucks I'm out, but if more Posts are good, I'll stay.

I thonk INTPs aren't necessarily verbose, but we do want to be meticulous. We want it to be coherent, accurate, so on. And we have a lot of content, even if it is similar.

I haven't decided not to read anybodys posts as of yet. I still think everybody has something to contribute. Also, a bad post on a good topic isn't going to stop anybody from continuing.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

There are long shitposts and there are short ones... I prefer the shorter ones. However, when it comes to quality and actual insight, the longer the better.

I tend to post rather tersely, and I am largely unable to say very much at once or I lack the motivation to do so. I find it easier much to converse in chat format or in-person. It's one of the major reasons I've never been a very prolific poster, and end up sticking to the shorter, more irreverent threads.

I also utterly dread long pms. It puts this aggravating pressure on me to respond sufficiently and that feeling ultimately makes me have even less to say. I also never have anything to say in cards or texts, unless there's some direct point. I much prefer actual small talk to small writing.

 

[redbaron]

Controlling for individual differentiation between the myriad topics of discourse on the forum and the brobdignanian dissimilarity of adroitness between individual poster's appurturnent to said myriad topics, it seems admissable that varying levels of savoir faire loquacity would palpably manifest.

Such an eventuality is not to be prognosticated perniciously, but rather integrated ardently into one's perception of our idiosyncratic yet venerable forum.

 

[Deleted member 1424]

Controlling for individual differentiation between the myriad topics of discourse on the forum and the brobdignanian dissimilarity of adroitness between individual poster's appurturnent to said myriad topics, it seems admissable that varying levels of savoir faire loquacity would palpably manifest.

Such an eventuality is not to be prognosticated perniciously, but rather integrated ardently into one's perception of our idiosyncratic yet venerable forum.

Well.... It IS the 5th of November.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQyqx1K495U

 

[The Gopher]

I find my replies sometimes tend to become long. Part of the reason is I try to reply to objections that might come forth from my reply. So I attempt to counter objections before they are made.

I tend to repeat things in different ways, solving different objections to account for the different people.

Because I tend to say things multiple times to ensure the point comes across and to ensure people with differing perspectives still understand it individuals who are not part of a collective hive may find my posts long.

If due to extrapolating on theories and ideas to remain inclusive people indicate the length of my posts I tend to tone down my posts and accept the need to reply to those outside the standard deviation.

See now if everyone thinks the same it's very easy to write a concise post that everyone interprets correctly without the need to accommodate a holistic society, the issue with writing short posts is that you leave yourself open to misinterpretation.

Unfortunately this means in very few scenarios is writing short posts skillful. (if you understand the English language) Unless you are completely amazing someone will find a way to misinterpret your post if it is short and while saying things succinctly is good and thought of as skillful you leave yourself open to... (hold up where's the thesaurus..) hordes distorting your message.

Society as a whole is varied and unique in it's individual and group falsifying of statements due to this... Obviously I'm demonstrating the ridiculous side of tailoring ones message so that mortals can fathom a otherwise brief point.

 

[Grayman]

I don't mind rappers. I like their linguistic abilities and appreciate their self expression with their unique connection of words. BUT, it is a little weird and distracting when someone starts rapping in the middle of discussion or debate.

EDIT: This is an anololology pogy hoggy sat on a loggy

 

[onesteptwostep]

I don't think verbosity was what Sinny meant when she said it there, it's probably against replies which are purely emotional or undeveloped masked in language, rather than 'verbose' 3, 4 syllable words.

No one is really verbose here, we just all have different styles and tones. The level of amiability/sociability differs for each post, as well. I think annoyance comes more from how one structures their posts and paragraphs.

Well.... It IS the 5th of November.

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQyqx1K495U

V for Vendetta is, excuse me for saying this, one of the most out of context taken pieces of history/literature to ever surface as film in the past decade. Simply put, the way people use it to lofty underscore their irrational dislike for the government is... such a meme. >:/

 

[Deleted member 1424]

V for Vendetta is, excuse me for saying this, one of the most out of context taken pieces of history/literature to ever surface as film in the past decade. Simply put, the way people use it to lofty underscore their irrational dislike for the government is... such a meme. >:/

Behind this mask there is a meme and memes are bullet proof.
Don't you at least appreciate the meta?

Anyway I'm much fonder of the comic and Alan Moore, but Weaving's monologuing makes me happy. Taking this thread into an anti-anarchy direction, or whatever it is you had in mind, is just derailing...

 

[onesteptwostep]

D:

edit: I don't mind November 5th being 'verbosity day', sure ^^

 

[Urakro]

D:

Not verbose enough. Please elaborate.

 

[Hadoblado]

Controlling for individual differentiation between the myriad topics of discourse on the forum and the brobdignanian dissimilarity of adroitness between individual poster's appurturnent to said myriad topics, it seems admissable that varying levels of savoir faire loquacity would palpably manifest.

Such an eventuality is not to be prognosticated perniciously, but rather integrated ardently into one's perception of our idiosyncratic yet venerable forum.

Spoiler

RB banned for being smurf of previously self-exiled member snafupants.

I use a thesaurus/dictionary daily and try to use any word I find (or create) that fits, so that the neural pathways are forged and maintained and I remember and know more in the process of forming a post.

I tend to appreciate skillful word and sentence constructions, even to the point of redundant elaboration.

I consider myself an active student of english, despite maybe some relative mastery I've gathered so far.

This describes my approach too. I'm really very bad with vocabulary, and require constant assists from thesaurus or whoever I'm talking to at the time. I see it as something that requires constant attention and effort, but is important enough to commit activity to. My ability to recall words and their meaning is atrocious, but I'm able to recognise and understand them most of the time.

Speaking of which (he says as he lays torch to his own prescribed methods), I try to limit myself to one "good" word per post, as that's what I like to see in others. If I have to learn more than one word to understand you then my engagement withers, but I'm more happy to learn one word than I am none.

In regards to OP, the optimal post length is defined in my mind by how many people you convince or at least influence. There would be some secondary criteria for who those people are, and there'd be other goals behind posting than reaching people.
If this is your aim, the post should have just enough fluff to ease the burden of reading it, while the rest is as dense as possible without ruining flow.
By this criteria, a poor post is one that either lacks substance or makes the reader feel like they're chewing on lead, and a good post is one that is simple and short for the content it communicates while still maintaining interest of the reader.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Not verbose enough. Please elaborate.

Are you familiar with Hard Drives?

C: usually denotes 'C' drive while D: usually denotes the drive 'D'.

Have you also noticed that many of negative words in English start with the letter D as well? For example: death, despair, despondency, delinquency, detention, dementor, demented, devil, pebble, rabble, ramble

As you can see many, though not all, are negative in some sense.

 

[Sinny91]

So are a lot of replies too verbose? If so, why? Is it a good thing or a less good thing?

I find my replies sometimes tend to become long. Part of the reason is I try to reply to objections that might come forth from my reply. So I attempt to counter objections before they are made.

I guess it's also somewhat difficult to predict what people will intuitively understand, so you might elaborate unnecessarily. Or perhaps it's just an inefficient way of translating thoughts to words?

In what ways do you find other members too verbose?
Why are you verbose?
Do you enjoy or dislike people who write long posts? (Perhaps it depends).

'A lot' of the posts are verbose from certain members.
Other members are succinct, whether the length of the post be long or not.

I had some prime examples just the other day, but didn't bother to highlight them. What prompted my comment at this particular time is/was the fact that we are 4 pages into the 'patriachy ' thread, and yet for such a length of discussion, barely anything relevant has been spoken.

I suppose it's a trend in general for P's to get sidetracked; but then there's just the frivolous, and I percieve many posts to be 'frivolous'.

Luckily for me, the none 'frivolous' posts, by better quality contributors, make the visit worth while.

All in my humble opinion of course , I'm sure we all have different standards.

Personally I hate it when people beat around the bush to make a point that could be surmised in a couple of sentences or less.

I make exceptions for fine crafted peices of literature, that are a literary joy to read.

 

[Urakro]

Are you familiar with Hard Drives?

C: usually denotes 'C' drive while D: usually denotes the drive 'D'.

Have you also noticed that many of negative words in English start with the letter D as well? For example: death, despair, despondency, delinquency, detention, dementor, demented, devil, pebble, rabble, ramble

As you can see many, though not all, are negative in some sense.

I veritably appreciated that. Thanks.

Oh wait. That's not actually true, is it?

 

[onesteptwostep]

What is truth?

 

[Sinny91]

Are you familiar with Hard Drives?

C: usually denotes 'C' drive while D: usually denotes the drive 'D'.

Have you also noticed that many of negative words in English start with the letter D as well? For example: death, despair, despondency, delinquency, detention, dementor, demented, devil, pebble, rabble, ramble

As you can see many, though not all, are negative in some sense.

That's cool, do you know why that is? I suck with languages.

 

[onesteptwostep]

That's cool, do you know why that is? I suck with languages.

Well, you could always be good at emoticons like Hillary Clinton is trying to do now.

!

 

[cheese]

I don't seem to have any control over my posts when I'm bothering to make a point. I seem to write in enormous quantities no matter what I'm talking about and no matter how hard I try to be succinct. So I'm not going to reply in depth here, except to say that I'm invariably surprised by the length I produce (ladies).

 

[redbaron]

'A lot' of the posts are verbose from certain members.
Other members are succinct, whether the length of the post be long or not.

I had some prime examples just the other day, but didn't bother to highlight them. What prompted my comment at this particular time is/was the fact that we are 4 pages into the 'patriachy ' thread, and yet for such a length of discussion, barely anything relevant has been spoken.

I suppose it's a trend in general for P's to get sidetracked; but then there's just the frivolous, and I percieve many posts to be 'frivolous'.

Luckily for me, the none 'frivolous' posts, by better quality contributors, make the visit worth while.

All in my humble opinion of course , I'm sure we all have different standards.

Personally I hate it when people beat around the bush to make a point that could be surmised in a couple of sentences or less.

I make exceptions for fine crafted peices of literature, that are a literary joy to read.

Lol fuck off you're the forum's leading candidate in the department* of, "make two dozen posts alluding to nebulous concepts without succinctly explaining anything and then using the excuse of being too tired or not wanting to bother despite the fact that in the time you made 20 shitposts you could have easily provided at least two or three succint posts, leaving everyone wondering why you even use the forum at all."

*Department title subject to changes pending review by Patriarchal Verbosity Consulate.

 

[Grayman]

Job Application Tips:

No one is going to read every one of your references[links]. It is best use your three best. With a good cover letter that fully elaborates on your intent and a decent application that is full of relative substance you might just get the job!

PS. Don't use too many analogies in your writing because the employer isn't going take take the time to figure out what the fuck you are saying when there are 100 other applicants. OH! and don't use foul language.

 

[Sinny91]

@Baron, I disagree. I willingly allude to concepts not familiar to the majority, but rest assured, they are all understood by the few... and that is the audience I cater for. If others feel left out, they best start catching up , as far as I care.

For the main part compared to most, my posts are constructed well, and are intended to be digestible.. unlike some others, who end up talking in riddles hoping to bog down their intellectual opponents within a sea of confusion.

'Define this, now define that, no, no, define that! define what this word means, no no no , you're using the wrong definition, okay that's better, oh wait no, wait, define that!'

Surely you admit that you have witnessed many debates deteriorate through similar scenarios?

Eta: It's just dawned on me, that you are one of the culprits . Define 'Metaphysics' *chuckles*.

 

[redbaron]

So you're posting things that only people who already know what you mean will know what you mean and don't care at all for anyone who doesn't. Therefore every post you make is just platitude, which brings us back to wondering why you even use the forum at all.

I guess you just like regurgitating platitudes?

By the way, we actually agree because exactly what you described yourself as doing is exactly what I was talking about. For some weird reason you seem to think it's a good thing that you put zero effort into your posts.

Surely you admit that you have witnessed many debates deteriorate through similar scenarios?

Deteriorate through people reurgitating platitudes without context and avoiding ever clarifying their point with a whole bunch of obviously bullshit excuses? Yeah.

 

[Sinny91]

I disagree with your notions for several reasons, but I don't feel like explaining myself to you.

 

[redbaron]

Didn't see that one coming

It's not like you ever feel like explaining anything to anyone really, so not sure why you bring it up anymore. Maybe instead you should just announce when you're willing to have a real discussion instead of declaring how not willing you are to have said real discussion ten times per day?

 

[zerkalo]

Eta: It's just dawned on me, that you are one of the culprits . Define 'Metaphysics' *chuckles*.

Sinny no offence but all you've done on that thread amounts to nothing more than cheerleading. You did not bother with taking the time to explain yourself, other people were doing the work for you while u just retorted with one liners. Btw im not belittling you or anything, just bringing this to your attention coz you seem to think that you demonstrate yourself with clarity on this board, when in fact most have trouble seeing where you're coming from because you dont elaborate.

 

[Sinny91]

I'm aware, I did go to work like I said I had to, and got back about an hour ago.

I informed Monkey that I would 'lead by example' when I returned, but that phrase in its self seems to have confused him.

I'll just wait for Monkey to answer my last posted questions to clear up any uncertainty, and then I will do what I said I was going to do.

That is in regards to that specific thread, but in regards to the 'verbose' question, you can take my comments as an opinion on the whole forum.

I'm by no means 'shy' of exploring my perception of the 'Patriachy' and it's percieved 'existance'; there are numerous examples and sources I could draw from. Culturally speaking, there is volumes written on the 'reality' of the 'patriachy'; the followers of the Catholic Church? Of Fundamental Islam?

I was wondering why none of this had been addressed previously, and was trying to prompt the other members into taking the cultural aspect of the 'Patriachy' into account.

Apparently I have been falling on deaf ears.. or its my inability to communicate.. but I thought made myself perfectly clear. Alas, I remain blind to my own shortcomings... apparently, lol.

 

[Kuu]

The asynchronous written format of forums lends itself to mindful extended writing, even if many people want to use it for mindless short-form texting more proper to instant messaging. That is what is good about forums.

Verbosity is not a problem per se. The problem is conceptual density as Haim has pointed out. Some people just spew words with little substance to them. Lack of substance is bad on short posts as well as long ones, but long ones are certainly more tedious. Conversely, I'd rather have long posts with substance, short posts just whet the appetite but leave one hungry.

A problem with somewhat long posts is it can saturate people with too many ideas, leaving them with nothing to add, or on the other hand, having too much to disagree/comment on that dissuades people of the effort required to discuss. There is also an increased danger of incoherence/disorganisation with longer posts, specially with those fond of stream-of-thought posting without editing.

Controlling for individual differentiation between the myriad topics of discourse on the forum and the brobdignanian dissimilarity of adroitness between individual poster's appurturnent to said myriad topics, it seems admissable that varying levels of savoir faire loquacity would palpably manifest.

Such an eventuality is not to be prognosticated perniciously, but rather integrated ardently into one's perception of our idiosyncratic yet venerable forum.

Indeed. However, there are limits to diversity to ensure overall enjoyment...

(This kind of writing exemplifies a different problem than verbosity, rather the opposite. Careful choice of vocabulary can provide depth of meaning with succinctness, but at the cost of broad comprehensibility. The more elaborate the vocabulary, the less people have the required lexicon to fully understand it. Language complexity is subject to diminishing returns.)

Personally, to answer Minuend's questions, I rather use as many or as little words as is appropriate for the thoughts I'm trying to communicate, striving for plain words as much as possible but without an excessively dry or dumbed down text. Sometimes one line is all you need.

And your elaborate posts are really excellent, Minuend.

 

[Kuu]

Addendum:

@RB, @Sinny perhaps the discussion of specific individual posters' worth or lack thereof is potentially unhelpful to the thread at hand? There are other places for witchhunting here.

(IMHO a "I disagree but don't want to bother explaining it to you" reply is a legitimate and probably more mature response than starting an endless and fruitless poop-throwing contest).

And if anyone cares, many negative D- words are actually De- words, because of Latin de and dis-.

 

[redbaron]

I personally think that the act of highlighting the jutting irony of Sinny's assertions as to the inability of other posters to write with clarity is a meaningful one considering she makes more than half a dozen posts per day and that it was one of her comments that spurred the creation of this thread in the first place.

Normally I'd agree that it's more mature to decline to debate if you're lacking the energy to do it properly, but it remains to be seen whether Sinny even can discuss properly. It's the default response she gives when some kind of inquiry into one of her frequent poorly worded posts is made.

I'd have to disagree that challenging the forum's equivalent of a bubblehead cheerleader regurgitating practiced phrases is a bad thing, but you're right that it can be tedious for others to read. I know that, but I'm also aware before I enter certain discussions that I'm going to have to explain and re-explain things 37 times before the other person even begins to understand, so I approach the discussion willing to clarify myself almost ad infinitum not necessarily for the one I'm in dialogue with but for whatever other audience is there.

If you're not willing to do that, don't sit there stating a dozen times how you're right and someone else is wrong but you just can't be bothered showing it. Lazy and self-gratifying as all shit.

Post 5/37 complete

Kidding, I'll let it die here. I'll have to make my own "who wants 2 fite" thread in The Arena.

 

[Sinny91]

It's me taking advantage of the freedom I have to ignore your shit, and post about things I want to post about.

'Decline a debate' 'discuss things properly'.
I refer you back to my post about 'riddles'.
I'm more than happy to engage with people who genuinely seek clarity, understanding and progression; but I won't play tit for tat with people who have no intention exploring subject matter for understandings sake, who would rather get hung up on certain points and attempt to win arguments which lack efficiency or relevance.

But much of my world view is embedded in the 'Metaphysical', so I wouldn't expect you to be able to sympathise with me.

But yea, what Kuu said, enough of this.
And thanks for the factoid Kuu.

 

[redbaron]

It's me taking advantage of the freedom I have to ignore your shit, and post about things I want to post about.

It's not really ignoring when you're still making 5 posts a day on the topic. By all means if you don't want to make the effort to respond, then don't. Littering a topic with half-thoughts and acting like you're being clear and others aren't isn't ignoring though, it's just shitposting from a high horse.

 

[Pyropyro]

Forum posts are verbose? My lady, are you sure that you find our text long-winded and full of pretentious grandiloquence?

I must say, that I am quite affronted no... provoked, offended and quite insulted that you imply that our posts as full of repetitious superfluous rhetoric!

I have you know that our posts are concise, up to the point and brief rather than your accusation that they are merely long-winded ramblings that are pretending as magniloquent treatise.

Spoiler

I really enjoy long discourses as long as the post's flow and structure are smooth and it also has enough decent references for me to study for further reading.

INTPf contains some quality long posts and some not so good ones. Fortunately, there are some very good writers and/or researchers in our ranks.

 

[Puffy]

It's not to do with your interests sinny, there's a lot I could write about metaphysics, "the occult", and sometimes do. Me and RB were finding common ground in that thread fine.

The forum attracts predominantly people who are not predisposed towards the position your posts represent, and so to them you're making extraordinary claims whether you're correct or not. It's a question of being able to adapt to the demands of the type of environment that you're in, otherwise it comes across like you're treating your presence here as an internal monologue.

@RB -- I think the way you choose to confront someone and/ or debate, whether deliberate or not, is sometimes received as hostile. From what I saw on the metaphysics thread, the entirety of their responses to you were nothing to do with what you were actually saying, they were rather just responding to the fact that they were being challenged by you. It was just a cycle of you pressing your point and them being defensive in response to perceived hostility. It was evident that the conversation was never going to be productive.

But I agreed with you in that thread tbh. I think you're picking on sinny because you perceive that others are being too polite to make the same points you are.