I downvoted you. Here is why: - that last parenthetical 'possibly you are a teacher'. It is clear from his post he is a teacher. That comment is an attempt to

I downvoted you. Here is why: - that last parenthetical 'possibly you are a teacher'. It is clear from his post he is a teacher. That comment is an attempt to lend credence to your assertions by making yourself seem insightful and semi-clairvoyant, by 'guessing' he is a teacher. We all understand he is a teacher. I hate it when people use sneaky fallacies like that. - You accuse someone of 'not giving useful advice' and 'managing to be vague and vacuous', when you yourself do not offer any useful advice and fail to explain why the statements you are responding to would be 'vague and vacuous', making your own statement 'vague and vacuous'. When harshly criticizing someone, always make sure the criticism doesn't apply to your own argument or yourself. It prevents you from looking like a hypocrite. - It is completely unclear what you intend to achieve with your criticism. Do you honestly believe someone will respond like 'oh jeez, you're right, how could I be so silly?'. Your post is abrasive and will not achieve its goal. Did it even have a purpose other than 'throwing your thoughts out there'? If not: please stew on them a bit longer next time and explain why you are telling us this. - In fact, the post you respond to makes a very practical point, much more practical than the more 'vague' general rules Russell provides. It is not a 'needless restatement': it is a much needed explication of what practical behavior these rules lead to. It provides an example of an application of Russell's principles, that makes those principles concrete.