On July 21 2011 08:39 CecilSunkure wrote:
I skimmed over it, and looked for things like credentials or a section explaining how he knows what he knows, or something on practical applications. I just only read the first bit in detail and gave advice on it from the standpoint of a writer/reader. So I don't really get why you're being so critical when I don't see I did anything wrong.
I skimmed over it, and looked for things like credentials or a section explaining how he knows what he knows, or something on practical applications. I just only read the first bit in detail and gave advice on it from the standpoint of a writer/reader. So I don't really get why you're being so critical when I don't see I did anything wrong.
There is nothing wrong with your advice. However, I feel that the first paragraph of the OP was the weakest one, there are some good concepts in the rest of his guide. I particularly like Section 3 where he talks about different types of advantages and gave examples. I see a lot of new topics on TL that go like "I had more supply and more workers but I still lost". People need to understand that economic advantages can be counter balanced by other advantages. This is only one example of the merits in the OP. If I may suggest that you read the rest of his guide in detail, you may actually find elements that you do like.
Edit: Anihc have stated earlier that this guide has a lot of potential that is not being explored, because the OP failed to give sufficient examples and real applications. I agree with him, if the OP put in more work to revise this guide, it can turn into something of much value.
I'm being critical because I respect the highlighted user status and expect more from you since you are a highlighted user. I don't like the fact that you claimed that his guide had little value when you've only read the first section in detail. As a highlighted user you have more responsibility to set an example. Passing judgement on a guide while you have only read one section is not setting a good example to other users. I agree with your points that his post lacked credential and his opening section was not very convincing. I simply expected a highlighted user to at least read the whole thing before commenting.