What to do with Brad? (Yet another Brad McFall topic)

I agree with the many above that Brad should not be involuntarily committed, since he seems to post in good faith. He has also produced some of the finest scientific Beat poetry I've seen - a recent example: Some pretty sweet wordplay.On the other hand, [Brad if you're reading this], perhaps he will voluntarily partake in some bootcamp training to improve his communication (I think I read a post of his at one point stating he was trying to improve).Brad must realize that >95% of his remarks go ignored - perhaps he will voluntarily commit himself to reduce that percentage...

Brad! In no way was my post meant to be insulting, it was meant to be complementary; and I don't think you should be 'banished' by any means, unless you yourself desire to better communicate with the rest of the forum. I KNOW!I wasn't saying your posts were solely word-play, but that you often express your content in an almost poetic way (whether you realize it or not).Really, Brad, it was a complement.But do realize that the vast majority here don't read or don't understand your posts, and not because of our intelligence or desire (necessarily).You write: True, Brad, most of us don't know what you're talking about.
So explain it to us; try to express your ideas in a way that the rest of us can understand.For example, you incessantly name-drop, as in the post I'm replying to... try to accept the fact that few in the forum have an idea of Smalhausen's work, let alone how it applies to your argument, or a rereading of Kant. Perhaps try to post without the name-dropping, and with more explanation of the work done by the people with the names?Hopefully you'll take this as constructive, do what you will with it...

Hey Brad,Just to let you know, your first paragraph was a lot more understandable than your second paragraph (though your second paragraph is likely more interesting... if I could fully understand it)