quick comment: I like the content of the google doc that I’ve read (so far) but I only clicked on it at all because of this comment (and it’s kind of ugly so I may not have even read it if I clicked on it). Out of curiosity, why couldn’t it have been included in the post itself?
(edit: I don’t think “Currently in early stages, so you will need to be sharp and knowledgeable to get the gist of my intentions” is a good idea. It sends signals of unjustified arrogance, even if it ends up being true)
I didn’t include the contents in the link because I thought it would make the post too long and I thought it had a different main idea, so I figured it would be better if I made two separate posts. I can’t because of the automatic rate-restriction, but maybe maybe it would’ve been a better post if I included the contents of the linked doc in the post itself.
I’m realizing that I’m packing an unusually large amount of information within a single post, and I only attempt to fill gaps in information with links & footnotes that will take a significant amount of time to read, and I made little effort to give readers the motivation to read them.
In my next post, I’ll try to give a better reason for reading & I’ll be more thorough clarifying my positions & claims.
I also re-read the comment you’re referring to from the perspective of if someone else had written it, and I see what you mean. I Edited it to “Currently in early phases, so forgive me for linking to a series of incomplete thoughts”. Hopefully that sets expectations low without appearing arrogant or condescending.
quick comment: I like the content of the google doc that I’ve read (so far) but I only clicked on it at all because of this comment (and it’s kind of ugly so I may not have even read it if I clicked on it). Out of curiosity, why couldn’t it have been included in the post itself?
(edit: I don’t think “Currently in early stages, so you will need to be sharp and knowledgeable to get the gist of my intentions” is a good idea. It sends signals of unjustified arrogance, even if it ends up being true)
Thanks for commenting.
I didn’t include the contents in the link because I thought it would make the post too long and I thought it had a different main idea, so I figured it would be better if I made two separate posts. I can’t because of the automatic rate-restriction, but maybe maybe it would’ve been a better post if I included the contents of the linked doc in the post itself.
I’m realizing that I’m packing an unusually large amount of information within a single post, and I only attempt to fill gaps in information with links & footnotes that will take a significant amount of time to read, and I made little effort to give readers the motivation to read them.
In my next post, I’ll try to give a better reason for reading & I’ll be more thorough clarifying my positions & claims.
I also re-read the comment you’re referring to from the perspective of if someone else had written it, and I see what you mean. I Edited it to “Currently in early phases, so forgive me for linking to a series of incomplete thoughts”. Hopefully that sets expectations low without appearing arrogant or condescending.