"it is more likely you writing needs improving if the message didn't come across properly." I disagree. A priori, it is equally likely not more. If you try read a calculus textbook and you don't understand anything, it is not more likely that the message needs improving. It might be that the message needs improving or that the reader needs a better understanding of the underlying concepts (in this case trigonometry, in our case probability theory).(Original post by GuppyFox)
If you're taking such a stab, just remember that it is more likely you writing needs improving if the message didn't come across properly. For instance, it makes not a lot of sense to say why avatar-ed people have no avatars, especially when you say the word 'keep' which suggests they don't have one when they do. This is poor writing as it is open to different interpretation (I understand the point you were trying to make, after all).
Also, this is a forum, not a masters thesis.
"it makes not a lot of sense to say why avatar-ed people have no avatars". Yes, it does if one refers to someone who decides to have avatars and at a particular moment in time removes his avatar with the intention of adding another one at some point in the future.
"especially when you say the word 'keep' which suggests they don't have one when they do." I repeat, "avatar-ed people" refers to someone who decides to have avatars and at a particular moment in time removes his avatar with the intention of adding another one at some point in the future. The word "keep" in our case refers to the lack of action regarding the avatar feature in their profile. So I said that a user who removes his current avatar (and hence is at that point avatar-less) is not likely to leave his profile without an avatar (i.e. he is likely to add a new one).
"This is poor writing as it is open to different interpretation". I disagree. I could give you a simple statement on a particular subject and it could still be open to an interpretation that is different to the one I intended. It does not necessarily mean that it is poor writing. Let me give you an example: if you knew that my weight and your weight are the same and I told you 'My current weight is 10 times yours.' you would think that what I said makes no sense and I have poor writing. But actually it does make sense. It just so happens that you lack the appropriate knowledge to interpret the information. This is exactly what happened to the user TornadoG4R. But if had appropriate scientific knowledge, you would understand that what I told you makes sense. It is perfectly possible that knowing that our weight is the same I can tell you "My current weight is 10 times yours". The key lies in understanding that weight is as used outside the quotes is a misnomer (born out of scientific illiteracy) of mass. You would understand that while mass does not change regardless of your location, your weight does change depending on your location.
Please, if you think this is a thesis, you obviously have not been in the Debate sub-forum or the Religion one. One needs not to write a thesis to make a reasoned argument showing that a particular user attempted to use an invalid metric to prove her point that users with avatars were a minority. Invalid metrics yield invalid semantics.
Turn on thread page Beta
Why are there so many people without avatars? watch
- 25-08-2015 15:44