Reply #3: Too bad. He lost me at 'disincents'.

[enlightenment]

If an academic has to resort to stupid jargon because his vocabulary is so deficient, I have to wonder about the quality of the research he conducts and conclusions he reaches.

Not to mention the horrific 'it was' switch in the second paragraph. When WHAT 'was' done? Is he referring to the action taking place - in the present - in the first sentence? The 'it was' isn't referencing that - is it?

The third paragraph is largely incomprehensible.

I understand that there is a point in there, somewhere, and it might be a relevant one. Hard to tell.

My twenty year old students' write about as clearly as this PhD. sigh.