>4) awkward copy that jumps from marketing-style speak to explaining interactions from an analytical point of view. This is the most minor of all points but jus

>4) awkward copy that jumps from marketing-style speak to explaining interactions from an analytical point of view. This is the most minor of all points but just hurts the polish of the piece.< This is important, and often separates the good from the bad...can't count the number of websites I've visited, or products I've considered buying, where I was stopped short because of marketing that appears to have been hastily constructed, or that undervalued consistency in presentation... That always puts my head on a swivel--are the ideas being presented, the product being sold, etc., of actual value, when the front-end appears thrown together, or carelessly edited? You don't do an admitted novice a favor by pulling punches...they deserve honest feedback...they can aggregate opinions, and come to their own conclusions as to how to move forward...that's crowd-sourcing in a nutshell, right?