> His actual thesis is in the very next clause of that sentence: "it's usually safe to conclude the converse: something that seems clumsily written will usually

> His actual thesis is in the very next clause of that sentence: "it's usually safe to conclude the converse: something that seems clumsily written will usually have gotten the ideas wrong too." This analysis in the article feels woefully uncharitable and is incompatible with HN guidelines, ironically, but if internalized leads directly to the nitpicking style frequently seen on HN as a substitute for elucidation of ideas not well expressed on the way to deeper analysis. Dismissing mediocre writing out of hand seems classist more than anything.