I always downvote stream-of-consciousness posts. If you do not respect your audience enough to put an effort into writing something readable (clear, concise, catchy), you deserve a downvote.
To clarify for my understanding: you disliked my writing style (as you describe it, “stream-of-consciousness”), and feel that it was not ‘readable’ because of this—yes?
Always, ALWAYS use your opening paragraph to clearly state your main point.
If you feel you cannot adequately do that, chances are you do not know what your main point is. In that case, do not post, work on your draft until you do know.
I have tried to give an example by extracting the main point of your post from the mud that it is, but, unfortunately, came up empty. Well, almost empty, there was one definition I found:
“I describe acrohumanity as that state of achieving the maximum optimization of the human condition and capabilities by an arbitrary person that are available to that arbitrary person.” Naive though it might be, at least it is a core you can form your opening paragraph around.
Well, almost empty, there was one definition I found:
Well, my goal quite frankly was to foster conversation about the concept so as to improve the concept itself. I’ll have to think more on how to target that to the LW audience a little better, as it is becoming clearer to me over time that my patterns of thinking on various topics do not fall in line with the folks here.
I always downvote stream-of-consciousness posts. If you do not respect your audience enough to put an effort into writing something readable (clear, concise, catchy), you deserve a downvote.
To clarify for my understanding: you disliked my writing style (as you describe it, “stream-of-consciousness”), and feel that it was not ‘readable’ because of this—yes?
Always, ALWAYS use your opening paragraph to clearly state your main point.
If you feel you cannot adequately do that, chances are you do not know what your main point is. In that case, do not post, work on your draft until you do know.
I have tried to give an example by extracting the main point of your post from the mud that it is, but, unfortunately, came up empty. Well, almost empty, there was one definition I found:
“I describe acrohumanity as that state of achieving the maximum optimization of the human condition and capabilities by an arbitrary person that are available to that arbitrary person.” Naive though it might be, at least it is a core you can form your opening paragraph around.
Well, my goal quite frankly was to foster conversation about the concept so as to improve the concept itself. I’ll have to think more on how to target that to the LW audience a little better, as it is becoming clearer to me over time that my patterns of thinking on various topics do not fall in line with the folks here.
Thank you.
This looks like a classic example of “sour grapes”, an attempt to resolve your cognitive dissonance.