":: Wow, you're an idiot. Here's my imitation of Tao (include immature mocking tone): ""I think I know things. I think I can get people blocked. I think I know rules. Provide evidence you guys. Oh know there's some evidence, my bwain hurts, my bwain hurts, I forgot how to read, waaaaaaaah."" It is a proposal you fucking idiot. It shows you're wrong. You refusing to read it does not make you right. It just makes you stupid. You call it ""undergraduate"" as if it lacks validity when you refuse to read it which makes you not only and idiot, but a stubborn baseless idiot. Block me, bitch, I fucking beg you. What's taking you so long.  

 Practical proposal for change based on evidence provided above 
Simple to read for assholes who refuse to read:
Proposals:
1) change phrasing in intro
2) do not change focus of the majority of the page on the ""close circle""
3) perhaps make ""writers"" section more reader friendly for casual readers with a chart, or something quick and simple to read
4) change naming of ""writers"" section to something reflected broader scope
5) I would like something like 3 & 4 to be closer to the top, but I do recognize Doom's concern that it weighs down the intro, so we can see for now if it works.

I'm suggesting no change beyond that, but I feel I have provided the beginning of sufficient evidence to support the necessity of this change.  

"