By: Adrian (a.delete@this.acm.org), May 22, 2021 9:18 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Paul A. Clayton (paaronclayton.delete@this.gmail.com) on May 22, 2021 6:15 am wrote:
> I have tried to edit my previously written partial critique of the paper into a collection of responses to
> quotes from the paper. The organization is somewhat lacking; after I noticed cases of repeated content, I
> chose to prioritize posting latency over clarity and organization. (I.e., I gave up on writing a good post
> after having delayed for days.) The prevalance of tangential comments is significant (if less than many of
> my posts), and the length is absurd. Even so, a skimming of this post might be worthwhile to some.
>
>
I did not have a reason to reply to your post, because I mostly agree with your analysis.
I just want to mention that I appreciate when you spend significant time to write a lengthy analysis, even if I seldom reply to them, because I usually do not have reasons to disagree. So there are people who read your posts, despite their length, even when they do not comment on them :-)
> I have tried to edit my previously written partial critique of the paper into a collection of responses to
> quotes from the paper. The organization is somewhat lacking; after I noticed cases of repeated content, I
> chose to prioritize posting latency over clarity and organization. (I.e., I gave up on writing a good post
> after having delayed for days.) The prevalance of tangential comments is significant (if less than many of
> my posts), and the length is absurd. Even so, a skimming of this post might be worthwhile to some.
>
>
I did not have a reason to reply to your post, because I mostly agree with your analysis.
I just want to mention that I appreciate when you spend significant time to write a lengthy analysis, even if I seldom reply to them, because I usually do not have reasons to disagree. So there are people who read your posts, despite their length, even when they do not comment on them :-)
