[ExI] You know what?

[spike]

> Lee Corbin
...
> 
> Evidently it serves three roles. You do see people using it 
> to "gain time" as someone explained, and also to appear 
> inarticulate, as well as to solicit agreement... Lee


Lee, altho I do not disagree, the second item about intentionally appearing
inarticulate pains me.  I have seen plenty of distressing evidence of people
acting dumb.

I have an observation that you as a chessmaster will surely relate.  You
have perhaps played in a group of woodpushers down at the local open club.
Of course you beat them all like ugly stepchildren, but you didn't do
anything particularly brilliant, ja?  But when you were playing against
other masters, you uncorked some gorgeous, scorching attacks, or put up some
cold blooded defenses that would bring tears of joy to one's eyes, even if
you eventally lost.

Similarly in discourse, if one intentionally appears inarticulate, it
depresses the level of intelligence in the entire discourse to the inane.
Such discussion is a waste of time.  If one condenses out the fillers in
one's speech and does everything to raise the level of discourse, then so
much more worthwhile is that exchange.

My friends, I implore you to always strive to raise the level of discourse
by being as articulate as possible at every opportunity.

spike