Durnit. Caught me. I think I rushed the sentence, and my proofing on it tried to catch the spelling instead of keeping the clauses legible. Care to point out the rest of the "gobbledegook"? Cheers, Jaime A. Headden
You -- need -- an -- editor.In every post of yours (at least over the last, say, 5 years) that isn't trivially short, there are sentences or entire passages which you must have written "in real time", at the speed at which you _think_ (not even speak, but think). Some aren't even grammatical -- and that, sometimes, in ways that I can't tell where the mistake lies, so I cannot understand the sentence.
Very often you express yourself in ways that are three times as convoluted as necessary. To pick a trivial, entirely understandable example, your previous post had "was demonstrative of" where I'd have written "showed" or "illustrated". Given the speed at which you evidently write, however, these convolutions sometimes break off, topple over, roll down the hill like a comic-book avalanche, and make sentences or passages impossible to understand.
Usually, when this happens ( = when I have to give up trying to make sense of what you wrote -- and I don't give up easily), I simply ignore the sentences in question and think they can't have been that important, or I end up ignoring the entire topic. That seems to be a widespread reaction to your non-style of writing. Over the years, however, this has made at least some people more and more dismissive of you or even angry at you -- till Denver exploded.
Please take the time to read through your messages to find out if someone unfamiliar with you can understand them in detail. If necessary, rewrite them radically. I spent several times as much time editing this e-mail as writing it.
I send this to the list instead of privately to underscore the size of the problem and so I can get feedback from fourth parties.