Saying it was confusing would have been kind of bad; you might argue that it would be shorthand for “I am confused”, but just say “I am confused” and stop attributing mental characteristics to objects in the world already. But you called it “obscure”, and what can that possibly be shorthand for? “I am obscured”? And even more, you said it was “deliberately obscure” which I cannot but interpret as a property of the world, rather than of you, because the deliberation would have had to have taken place within the original poster. There is no possible way your use of the term “obscure” was virtuous.
My point is: do not assume something is obscure because you don’t know of it, and if it really takes you a few minutes to google something, you should get a better web browser.
“Deliberately obscure” means “the speaker (of the reference called “deliberately obscure”) sought out and used a reference that, relative to the speaker’s epistemology, a given member of the audience would be unlikely to understand.”
“Obscure” by itself means that “a member of the audience is unlikely to understand the reference”, where “unlikely” might refer to the epistemology of the speaker of the reference or the one who called it obscure, which may be resolved by context.
So, just because you don’t see how the use of a word could be virtuous, don’t assume that it can’t be.
On the other hand, if you don’t know, it doesn’t hurt to ask. Not every request for clarification has to be an accusation.
Saying it was confusing would have been kind of bad; you might argue that it would be shorthand for “I am confused”, but just say “I am confused” and stop attributing mental characteristics to objects in the world already. But you called it “obscure”, and what can that possibly be shorthand for? “I am obscured”? And even more, you said it was “deliberately obscure” which I cannot but interpret as a property of the world, rather than of you, because the deliberation would have had to have taken place within the original poster. There is no possible way your use of the term “obscure” was virtuous.
My point is: do not assume something is obscure because you don’t know of it, and if it really takes you a few minutes to google something, you should get a better web browser.
“Deliberately obscure” means “the speaker (of the reference called “deliberately obscure”) sought out and used a reference that, relative to the speaker’s epistemology, a given member of the audience would be unlikely to understand.”
“Obscure” by itself means that “a member of the audience is unlikely to understand the reference”, where “unlikely” might refer to the epistemology of the speaker of the reference or the one who called it obscure, which may be resolved by context.
So, just because you don’t see how the use of a word could be virtuous, don’t assume that it can’t be.
On the other hand, if you don’t know, it doesn’t hurt to ask. Not every request for clarification has to be an accusation.