188.8.131.52: Re: Self advertising
(2012-05-24 17:08) [#9412]
Nah, I like it. There is no better way to convey the author's hallmark "What am I missing? There must be a point here somewhere, maybe it is just very well hidden.." style than having all that utterly irrelevant drivel on a page with a very specific and clearly stated approach.
Then, RobertJasiek wrote:
I can't figure out what you are trying to say.
I am trying to say that it is often very hard to understand your thought processes, and that your contribution on the joseki book comparison page is a good example of that.
What is very well hidden?
In most of your argumentation, the point you are trying to make. Most people have a purpose in mind when they write something. When trying to understand your text, the predominant thought often becomes "I don't get it" or "One of us must be missing something terribly important, and I am not quite certain it's me..".
The author's (a specific author, who?) contents or the author's reminder of the readers' understanding of the contents?
This discussion is about an author, called Robert Jasiek, spamming a joseki book comparison page with a flood of irrelevant information about his own book, and whether such behaviour is acceptable. So the word "author" refers to you in this case. I know not of any reminders.
The contents in a book or the contents on which webpage?
This discussion is about a page on this wiki. You may find the link by scrolling up just a tiny amount. I'll have to refrain from offering any comments on the contents of your books, as I have never read any of them.
What is irrelevant and why?
Most of everything you added on that page is irrelevant. For the reason, see below.
What is specific and clearly stated and why?
The approach of the page. You can peek at the page to see the approach in very simple words near the top of the page. Just in case you are very busy, I'll copy-paste it here for your convenience: The following is a short comparison of several joseki books based upon a single line of a particular joseki -- the Takamoku, Keima Press and Crosscut line.
Since you for some reason also ask why: When an approach is stated clearly, then any readers and future contributors can easily understand how the page is supposed to work. That didn't seem to work out very well, though.
Now, the questions having been answered, here's a recap:
Most of the diagrams you added do not, in fact, contain the line with takamoku, the keima press and the crosscut, nor is most of the text about that particular joseki line. Therefore the bulk of your contribution is completely irrelevant on that page. It is not easy to guess why one would spend a considerable amount of time writing such a useless contribution.
This "not being able to guess what RJ thought"ness I find typical, which is what I tried to convey in a slightly jocular manner.
Should you need any further assistance in understanding my admittedly convoluted English, please do not hesitate to post another torrent of very important and rightly relevant questions right here.