[mrex]

It seems extremely unfair. Rather than focusing on the content, you're criticizing tone. It comes off as a structured tactic, given that famous image of Mudge with unkempt hair in a suit sitting before Congress, intended to draw attention away from his words and onto his rough edges. It's an ad hominem attack of a particularly cheap variety.

What sounds immature, unprofessional, and out of depth is Agrawal's mass e-mail tarnishing Zatko's reputation, a tactic that your post seems to repeat from a different angle.

I'd rather have the theory of general relativity written in crayon, than the most beautiful calligraphic illustration of nonsense. Wouldn't you?

[danielmarkbruce]

I'm criticizing the content. The first 20 pages are... bad.

I should have used the word "seem" rather than "sound" - "sound" does make it seem like I'm criticizing tone.

[mrex]

>I'm criticizing the content.

With all due respect, no you aren't. There isn't any criticism of the actual content in your post. It's all critiquing the tone - what style he used when writing, who you think he thinks his audience is, how informal his phrasing is. None of that has ANYTHING to do with content, it's all about form.