4 ms·
> Wells was way above James in quality In all of my twelve years on this godforsaken site, i had never had the displeasure of reading something more wrong; it
by GeoAtreides 2y ago
> Wells was way above James in quality
In all of my twelve years on this godforsaken site, i had never had the displeasure of reading something more wrong; it actually transcends being wrong and, as Pauli would put it, it's not even wrong.
- serious_angel 2y agoI may see it, but perhaps a more descriptive opinion of yours backed up with actual shades from your own viewpoint will provide a better trust with your comment. Sure, sometimes words cannot explain a thought, but effort may at least spread a few light rays on it supporting during discoveries. What do you think? Why do you, personally, disagree with someone's else opinion highlighting the whole 12 years of your experience of communication...
- nuz 2y agoI get what you're doing but I don't find this a fair caricature of james' writing style
- polynomial 2y agoFeels LLM generated. Clever either way.
- vundercind 2y agoIt's not even a pair of authors I'd have considered comparing in a "who's higher-quality" way. It's like comparing Spielberg and Aronofsky or something, as one being "way above" the other "in quality". I dunno, man... maybe? But I dunno. Pretty sure you can make it look like either one's way better than the other by picking your framing of "best", and in several different ways.
- CoastalCoder 2y ago> In all of my twelve years on this godforsaken site, i had never had the displeasure of reading something more wrong Perhaps you've simply forgotten the occasional comments that praise putting pineapple onto pizza? No matter of literary opinion can plumb those same depths of evil most foul.
- vixen99 2y agoOK, you don't agree! But why?