I certainly don’t assume that any particular reader has read all the sequences (nor that they should). I don’t think it’s so unreasonable to suggest reading one particular not-so-long post—whose title might give the game away to a sufficiently quick-witted reader without even needing to follow the link.
This is decreasing your work in commenting by increasing the work for some readers. It would be globally more useful to spend one minute on a better comment like the one Viliam_Bur has posted, than having an unknown number of people read the linked article to understand your point.
Your utility function and opinion may differ though, perhaps your intention was not primarily to get a point across but to make people read the article?
My intention was to get a point across. I thought that anyone who read my comment, didn’t find its meaning clear, and was interested enough that they’d have bothered to read a longer and more explicit one would probably also be willing to read the thing I linked to, and that they might find it interesting if they did.
(Being terse plainly hasn’t, in fact, decreased the amount of effort I’ve had to expend.)
I actually read the article due to your post and it was interesting. I agree to your point, just didn’t like the style and I could have been more diplomatic about it.
I certainly don’t assume that any particular reader has read all the sequences (nor that they should). I don’t think it’s so unreasonable to suggest reading one particular not-so-long post—whose title might give the game away to a sufficiently quick-witted reader without even needing to follow the link.
This is decreasing your work in commenting by increasing the work for some readers. It would be globally more useful to spend one minute on a better comment like the one Viliam_Bur has posted, than having an unknown number of people read the linked article to understand your point.
Your utility function and opinion may differ though, perhaps your intention was not primarily to get a point across but to make people read the article?
I’m sorry that you didn’t like my comment.
My intention was to get a point across. I thought that anyone who read my comment, didn’t find its meaning clear, and was interested enough that they’d have bothered to read a longer and more explicit one would probably also be willing to read the thing I linked to, and that they might find it interesting if they did.
(Being terse plainly hasn’t, in fact, decreased the amount of effort I’ve had to expend.)
I actually read the article due to your post and it was interesting. I agree to your point, just didn’t like the style and I could have been more diplomatic about it.
Keep posting. :-)