[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > On Feb 20, 6:02 pm, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > For what it's worth, I've found none of your threads in the last > > few weeks to make much sense at all, because of unclear and > > incoherent writing. On that basis, I dismiss them before trying to > > re-read them, because I don't want to spend my time trying to find > > sense in them that may not be there at all. > > How do I "bake" this idea? [loads of further verbiage apparently > nothing to do with what Ben Finney wrote]
Here's another example of the above point. I've no idea what the context is supposed to be of all the stuff you just wrote in your message. It's also written in a fractured style that makes it very difficult to follow. Hence, I tune out. > Are further problems a) miscommunication or b) absence of content? > If Holden and Genellina don't follow, that's a strong sign that the > structure of my proposals is really bad, even if there's a good > thing behind it. You just have to solve (a) before you solve (b), > which makes devoting resources to (a) a little preliminary. Agreed. I'll wait until you have better results from improving communication before I devote further resources to your messages. -- \ "It's a good thing we have gravity or else when birds died | `\ they'd just stay right up there. Hunters would be all | _o__) confused." -- Steven Wright | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
