5 ms·

Is it just me or is the way you construct sentences jarring and hard to read? Not sure if it's my dyslexia but I had trouble deciphering the first couple of par

Is it just me or is the way you construct sentences jarring and hard to read? Not sure if it's my dyslexia but I had trouble deciphering the first couple of paragraphs/word jumbles.

usefulcat 2y ago
Is this meta-meta commentary? I genuinely don’t know but if so I salute you.
- GlacierFox 2y ago
  Haha yeah. I just found those no-period, scattered paragraphs personally hard to read and take in.
  - cdchn 2y ago
    You're spot on; every paragraph is one sentence, except for one paragraph that is two sentences.
windowshopping 2y ago
No you're not alone but I didn't realize it until you said it. And I am not dyslexic.
gk1 2y ago
+1 I read the whole comment and still have no idea what point they’re making or even what side they’re on. To the grandparent: if you put in the effort to make yourself more clear, you might get the quality responses you wish for.
antegamisou 2y ago
No, this person/LLM model indeed writes way too long sentences.
TeaBrain 2y ago
It's not you. The entire comment is a disorganized mess of poorly thought out and non-cohesive grammar. In the section quoted below for example, he starts off by writing about critiques, in which he appears to have immediately grasped for words that aren't suited for the purpose, such as how the nonsensical "personalized to" should have been "focused on". He add the completely unnecessary pseudointellectual "to one extent or another", to make it seem like he is intensely judging ideas. He then says the "social purpose" is "universal" which I'm not following the meaning of at all. I doubt many others are either, but it just seems like another pseudointellectual throwaway. He then follows that with "which is that I felt uncomfortable that reading this might mean I have to re-evaluate my worldview", which is perhaps the most atrociously nonsensical and poorly laid out sentence fragment I've read in a long time. In the part following that, he needed a period before "actually" for it to make sense as he likely intended. Honestly, it seems like he's just trying to write words as they come to him as if in a heated and rash spoken conversation, in which he has a elevated personal impression of erudition, compared to the people he believes he communicating down to. "The actual critiques are personalized to the content and, to one extent or another, valid, but the social purpose of the critiques is universal which is that I felt uncomfortable that reading this might mean I have to re-evaluate my worldview and I'm going to dive into the comment section and upvote all the people telling me actually, I don't have to do that."
- barrkel 2y ago
  Personalized to doesn't mean focused on; it means subjective and relative to the critic. The "social purpose of the critiques is universal" is saying that, in opposition to the disparate and varied, personalized, nature of the specific critiques, their social purpose is all the same. This universal purpose is saying "I felt uncomfortable ... might have to re-evaluate world view ... I'll upvote all the detractors". > elevated personal impression of erudition This is ironic, I have to say. Anyhow, I found it easy to read the comment. It does flow a bit like stream of consciousness, but it's comprehensible, probably in part because I agree with a good amount of it. You shouldn't expect polished prose in comment forums on the interwebs. If you felt that it talked down to you (personalized), then perhaps evaluate the social purpose of your own comment (did you feel uncomfortable? I got the impression you did).
barrkel 2y ago
Read the second paragraph as if it's paraphrasing the people he's pointing at in the first paragraph. I found it quite clear. But then I agreed with it.

Is it just me or is the way you construct sentences jarring and hard to read? Not sure if it's my dyslexia but I had trouble deciphering the first couple of paragraphs/word jumbles.

usefulcat 2y ago

Is this meta-meta commentary? I genuinely don’t know but if so I salute you.

GlacierFox 2y ago
Haha yeah. I just found those no-period, scattered paragraphs personally hard to read and take in.
- cdchn 2y ago
  You're spot on; every paragraph is one sentence, except for one paragraph that is two sentences.

windowshopping 2y ago

No you're not alone but I didn't realize it until you said it. And I am not dyslexic.

gk1 2y ago

+1 I read the whole comment and still have no idea what point they’re making or even what side they’re on. To the grandparent: if you put in the effort to make yourself more clear, you might get the quality responses you wish for.

antegamisou 2y ago

No, this person/LLM model indeed writes way too long sentences.

TeaBrain 2y ago

It's not you. The entire comment is a disorganized mess of poorly thought out and non-cohesive grammar. In the section quoted below for example, he starts off by writing about critiques, in which he appears to have immediately grasped for words that aren't suited for the purpose, such as how the nonsensical "personalized to" should have been "focused on". He add the completely unnecessary pseudointellectual "to one extent or another", to make it seem like he is intensely judging ideas. He then says the "social purpose" is "universal" which I'm not following the meaning of at all. I doubt many others are either, but it just seems like another pseudointellectual throwaway. He then follows that with "which is that I felt uncomfortable that reading this might mean I have to re-evaluate my worldview", which is perhaps the most atrociously nonsensical and poorly laid out sentence fragment I've read in a long time. In the part following that, he needed a period before "actually" for it to make sense as he likely intended. Honestly, it seems like he's just trying to write words as they come to him as if in a heated and rash spoken conversation, in which he has a elevated personal impression of erudition, compared to the people he believes he communicating down to. "The actual critiques are personalized to the content and, to one extent or another, valid, but the social purpose of the critiques is universal which is that I felt uncomfortable that reading this might mean I have to re-evaluate my worldview and I'm going to dive into the comment section and upvote all the people telling me actually, I don't have to do that."

barrkel 2y ago
Personalized to doesn't mean focused on; it means subjective and relative to the critic. The "social purpose of the critiques is universal" is saying that, in opposition to the disparate and varied, personalized, nature of the specific critiques, their social purpose is all the same. This universal purpose is saying "I felt uncomfortable ... might have to re-evaluate world view ... I'll upvote all the detractors". > elevated personal impression of erudition This is ironic, I have to say. Anyhow, I found it easy to read the comment. It does flow a bit like stream of consciousness, but it's comprehensible, probably in part because I agree with a good amount of it. You shouldn't expect polished prose in comment forums on the interwebs. If you felt that it talked down to you (personalized), then perhaps evaluate the social purpose of your own comment (did you feel uncomfortable? I got the impression you did).

barrkel 2y ago

Read the second paragraph as if it's paraphrasing the people he's pointing at in the first paragraph. I found it quite clear. But then I agreed with it.