All of these make sense. Again, I’m generally pro-more-explanation all things being equal.
The question is what the norm should be when more explanation trades off against “people bothering to write the comment in the first place”. My first comment here was something I easily might have not bothered to write in the first place if I had felt obligated to write up anything more than a quick “hey, your ‘we statement’ here doesn’t apply to everyone.”
In this particular case, it’s possible that it was net negative to write my OC because it was sufficiently unclear that people didn’t even know what part of the text I was referring to. So I’d endorse at least being more clear about what I was objecting to.
But I’m pretty hesitant about norms that say “if you’re going to engage at all, you have to engage a lot.”
All of these make sense. Again, I’m generally pro-more-explanation all things being equal.
The question is what the norm should be when more explanation trades off against “people bothering to write the comment in the first place”. My first comment here was something I easily might have not bothered to write in the first place if I had felt obligated to write up anything more than a quick “hey, your ‘we statement’ here doesn’t apply to everyone.”
In this particular case, it’s possible that it was net negative to write my OC because it was sufficiently unclear that people didn’t even know what part of the text I was referring to. So I’d endorse at least being more clear about what I was objecting to.
But I’m pretty hesitant about norms that say “if you’re going to engage at all, you have to engage a lot.”
(see my reply to Christian for some more context)