I’m not sure if you meant to use “salient” here, but I definitely wasn’t trying make my writing that.
No, I meant ‘saliency’. The sentence called for the noun form, not the adjective base.
I just clearly failed to explain what it was that I found salient and it’s not as self-evident in the light of your message as I hoped. Alas.
I’m also not sure…state that thing should be in by now.
I appreciate the reiteration, but you’re still perpendicular parallel (Edit: Geometry is hard) to the point I was trying to make.
Which does not contradict yours, but seeks to expose the individualist core from which the sentiments you are focusing on one abstraction layer above stem from.
I was not focusing on individualist anything.
And then, “holding us back,” itself casts a normative…
Oh. This is my dear friend, ‘semantics’ and its effects on perception, isn’t it? That’s what’s going on here.
I have neither time, nor will for this particularly loathsome recurring motif, as of the time of this writing.
It does not matter if my point did not carry across, ultimately. Your message is still fine and if more people followed it, they’d arrive closer to what I was trying and failed to communicate anyways, so by all means, carry on.













Yes, ego. Absolutely no other possible interpretation. My deepest apologies for wasting your graciousness, I am so undeserving of it, and you illustrate your point oh so well here…
[For those who come across this and are confused about this exchange: Do take the other commenter’s original message to heart, and see the rest of his interactions for a demonstration of ‘intent’ vs ‘action’ for a glimpse of mine.]