MerylStreep
ElderPerson
I pointed out to you that we didn’t need educating as to who Delia Smith is and her influence.
Now you’ve done it again with your link to autism and Aspergers.
Could you give some thought, for your own sake ? that most posters will be very aware, even have members of their family with these conditions so therefore don’t need you to educate them. Just think about your links ie, would most people know this. Chances are: most posters on GN do ?
The way that I look at it is that it is better to mention something and include a link on the basis that some readers might not know of something, even though many may.
Better twice than not at all.
I went to an exhibition about network computing in around 1990 knowing hardly anything about it and wanting to learn.
People seemed very reticent to tell me anything.
So I said to the man on one stand "I don't know much about this. I'm here to try to learn, I'm not the sort of person who gets annoyed if you tell me something I already know".
That unlocked the problem. The man then told me lots for quite a while and we had a good conversation, and if I already knew some bit I was diplomatic about it.
I tried that at other stands and it worked wonders.
Some people, lots apparently, get annoyed if someone explains something and they already know it. But it is very difficult for someone there to advise where to pitch if the advisor does not know the enquirer's existing level of knowledge. It varies greatly.
So, if someone reading this thread already knows of the Delia effect, fine.
If someone already knows about Asperger's syndrome, fine.
Them seeing the link is not patronising, telling grannies about sucking eggs and so on, it is just being thorough in making a post. Because some readers might not know.