Difference between revisions of "Talk:Directives for after Point Omega"

From Point Omega Research
Jump to: navigation, search
(Critical feedback based on Father's Day 2017 version: Feedback on the introdoction)
(= Father's day feedback on: Introduction)
Line 8: Line 8:
  
 
* The article was written at the request of Victor Koekkoek.
 
* The article was written at the request of Victor Koekkoek.
* The article should be read _after_ ''[[A guided tour through the Omega Research Wiki]]''.
+
* The article should be read '''after''' ''[[A guided tour through the Omega Research Wiki]]''.
 
** Or, at least, after having read ''[[Omega Research:About#Definitions of "Point Omega"|Definitions of "Point Omega"]]'', or ''[[Self-blindness in humans as prerequisite for the evolution of advanced intelligence#Point Omega|the same]]'' in ''[[Self-blindness in humans as prerequisite for the evolution of advanced intelligence]]''.
 
** Or, at least, after having read ''[[Omega Research:About#Definitions of "Point Omega"|Definitions of "Point Omega"]]'', or ''[[Self-blindness in humans as prerequisite for the evolution of advanced intelligence#Point Omega|the same]]'' in ''[[Self-blindness in humans as prerequisite for the evolution of advanced intelligence]]''.
 
* The information in this wiki is scattered about various islands of specialist knowledge,
 
* The information in this wiki is scattered about various islands of specialist knowledge,

Revision as of 10:53, 18 June 2017

Critical feedback based on Father's Day 2017 version

After repeated requests from User:Baby Boy for some critical notes on this article, I've picked Father's Day 2017 to start critically reading and responding. --BigSmoke (talk) 09:39, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

= Father's day feedback on: Introduction

The introduction is very long-winded. Twelve paragraphs are used to convey the following information:

Too much time is spent to convince the reader of the uniqueness of the information compiled on this wiki, and the unique, elite combination of mentality and intelligence that is required to follow the argumentation.