Originally Posted by
chipcom
As I have mentioned to you before...if the words you write are not interpreted in the way you intend by the reader, then the communication problem is yours, not the reader's. Communication isn't throwing up a wall of words and expecting people to use a crystal ball to understand your meaning.
It is the writer's responsibility to ensure that their intent is understood, not the reader's responsibility to somehow read the writer's mind.
I agree to a certain extent, but it's also a two-way street. The reader has an obligation to make a reasonable effort to understand what was intended. For example, communication with a reader who insists on going with a literal interpretation of everything that others write is not possible.
And any time there is a question as to the writer's intent, and the writer is there to clarify, uh, he, and nobody else, is the ultimate authority on what his own words mean. That should be obvious. I certainly wouldn't insist on my interpretation of your words when you're telling me you meant something else by them.
Remember, words are an intermediary step in communication. They represent a translation of the writer's thoughts into words, and then are interpreted again by the reader into his own understanding. Both translation and interpretation steps are subject to error. If there are ten people who read this post, there are ten different interpretations. Hopefully all will get the gist of what I intended, but some may not. It's always possible none will.