Got rid of the “and I think quite good.” I just meant I liked it enough to want to share it in a discussion post. I assume that’s not the interpretation that was annoying people. How did people read it that made it a crackpot signal?
What people disliked was the bad grammar. If you want people to react positively to what you write, you need to make it easy to read. This includes using good spelling (which you do seem to have managed to do) and good grammar.
Spelling checks are mandatory. For starters: “followability” is not a word. Neither is “dun” (well, actually it is, but not one that means anything relevant to your article). “Pascal” should always be capitalized.
The bit about the article starting as a comment can go away—who cares? And if we do, is that really the best thing to lead off with, to catch the reader’s interest? The first sentence after that is an awkward, rambly, run-on sentence.
And so on, and so forth. This article needs a lot of editing, at a bare minimum. I’m also fairly sure the content isn’t that interesting, but the lack of editing was sufficient to make me stop reading.
What people disliked was the bad grammar. If you want people to react positively to what you write, you need to make it easy to read. This includes using good spelling (which you do seem to have managed to do) and good grammar.
Exactly.
Spelling checks are mandatory. For starters: “followability” is not a word. Neither is “dun” (well, actually it is, but not one that means anything relevant to your article). “Pascal” should always be capitalized.
The bit about the article starting as a comment can go away—who cares? And if we do, is that really the best thing to lead off with, to catch the reader’s interest? The first sentence after that is an awkward, rambly, run-on sentence.
And so on, and so forth. This article needs a lot of editing, at a bare minimum. I’m also fairly sure the content isn’t that interesting, but the lack of editing was sufficient to make me stop reading.