I agree that the core point is valuable and that this post is difficult to parse. I am confident I got it, but I have a lot of unfair advantages doing that, and it still required reflection.
My diagnosis is that this post assumes a lot of knowledge, both of concepts and terms, that are not reasonable to assume. In some cases links are provided, but in some cases they aren’t, and the links at best sort of get you off the hook here. The title is a huge hint to what is going on here, but the logic and terms involved need to be much more explicit.
I saw similar problems with your first main page post; it is clear that you overestimate what concepts and ideas readers are familiar with (even those who know a lot, often are missing any given thing, myself included), and how easily people can follow your logic.
I think that the better version of this post is roughly twice as long as this one.
(Note that this is not the general mistake people make, most people need to tighten things up, but this particular author making the opposite of a typical mistake should be entirely unsurprising.)
I’d like to try to figure out together what could make it and subsequent posts clearer.
I agree that the core point is valuable and that this post is difficult to parse. I am confident I got it, but I have a lot of unfair advantages doing that, and it still required reflection.
My diagnosis is that this post assumes a lot of knowledge, both of concepts and terms, that are not reasonable to assume. In some cases links are provided, but in some cases they aren’t, and the links at best sort of get you off the hook here. The title is a huge hint to what is going on here, but the logic and terms involved need to be much more explicit.
I saw similar problems with your first main page post; it is clear that you overestimate what concepts and ideas readers are familiar with (even those who know a lot, often are missing any given thing, myself included), and how easily people can follow your logic.
I think that the better version of this post is roughly twice as long as this one.
(Note that this is not the general mistake people make, most people need to tighten things up, but this particular author making the opposite of a typical mistake should be entirely unsurprising.)
I agree: the better version of this post is roughly twice as long as this one.