Might also help if you read back what you wrote before posting it, which you obviously haven't :

"Worse still is when a explanation relies of the use of an incorrect term." - hmmm this doesn't sound right to me, perhaps you meant, "Worse still is when AN explanation relies ON the use of an incorrect term."

"Yes, building glossaries and terminology dictionaries is boring but without a common dialect we might as be talking english at a martian." - think you may be missing a 'well' in there ;)

Now Kev, i'm sure you're going to now call me a pedantic nit-picking twat, or a moron, as you have done a few other people who have commented on previous posts, however, i'm actually making a point in the above, not in any attempt to nit pick or to be pedantic.

The point being is simple, *you* may not have a long attention span in all cases, however, my attention span is fair in most cases, bu lessened when i find it hard to follow a document due to poor english. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not one of those who will attempt to disagree with the points being made within a document, simply because of spelling mistakes, no thats not what i'm saying. In my case, if it's hard going reading a document, because the language actually doesn't flow, ie; i have to read sentences more than once or twice to work out what was meant, due to the flow of language, then my attention span to that document dwindles rapidly. As you know i don't like hard work, and when it comes to it, if a document is hard work to read, i quite quickly don't want to read it. Agreed, you could argue that this is a personal blog, and I dont have to read it if i dont wish to, but, the point still stands.

Another point i have with what is written in your post, 'More than that, who determines what's "simple enough"', it appears that you would suppose *you* do. I'm afraid that would be a hugely bad assumption to be making on your part. I think that you would find that the sensible answer to this would infact be that that decision would be made by those participating in any given conversation. The deciding factor as to what level of language a conversation would follow(ie; high level tech terms, or lower level layman terms, somewhere in between) would be the lowest level of the participants. What's the point in having a conversation at all, if the only person who understands what is being said is you ? Or what's the point in having a conversation with a group of people, when only a fraction have a clue what you are talking about ? I guess what i'm saying is, as a participant in a conversation, you need to guage the people you are talking to, and adjust your approach accordingly.

Which kind of brings me to addressing "we could use two tonnes of simple English in all cases but we do need to finish within our lifetimes." The answer to that one is simple, I'd rather spend a year taking time to understand an idea, in low level layman's terms, than a lifetime of you attempting to explain to me in your high level terms which i will never understand ;)

Yes i agree, tech terms are great, when a large majority of your audience understands you, and are agreed on the meaning of those terms. But, learning to adapt your conversational approach to those around you(in particular your audience), is, judging by your post, still a skill and a discipline you need to learn. You *may* even find a small amount of additional productivity coming out of it to !(although i already know your capability, and already know you are probably one of the most productive people out there)

The Great Jedi Conversationlist
K

Kev: Hit a nerve perhaps? See the disclaimer. Thanks for the typo check tho.