While these are clunky, was this phraseology that much of a problem for people? I don't like reading it, but I didn't find that I couldn't read it.

But slowing down to decipher text instead of single pass simple reading is the problem.

Random example from a session I have open:

> *One new failure mode the doubling opens, and how it is closed.* A ring never shrinks. With two 8-byte index words per record instead of one, the ring's doubling comes inside the budget's reach in the blank regime: a doubling taken [...]

It takes extra deciphering cycles to see "the doubling", "budget's reach", "the blank regime", etc. and figure out what it's referring to. I had to read that opening sentence multiple times. At first I parsed it like "One cat the table yawns".

Sometimes it's so encumbered I can't tell what it's saying at the directional level: good or bad, fast or slow? "Your blank regime negated the pre-armed run's dilemma but clawed back the overall metrics."

It's not how I'd phrase things if I were trying to be easily understood, though Claudese is probably great for LLMs due to ad hoc jargon usage.

I get tripped up on the intensity of its us and the ambiguity it tends to apply them with.

Minor inconvenience != load bearing, yet Claude consistently uses it while missing actual loading bearing things.

Likewise, it tends to jump to terminology that’s technically correct but practically meaningless.

just seeing it too often I'd imagine. I don't really mind it