Writers usually choose their audience. One of the purposes of choosing the audience is to make sure that all the readers have the same base understanding of the topic and have approximately the same level of knowledge about the issue. The author does not have to explain what exactly was meant by a controversial - for people outside of the topic - word, because everyone in the appropriate audience knows that. Time and space is saved for the actual development of the topic, not reiteration of the points that at this new essay already became basic and obvious. If the material ends up in the book, the audience is searching for this appropriate book, disregarding the books for other audiences. Here, intent meets the purpose. Thus, people with deep understanding of a particular field, would feel strange picking up a specialized book about a completely foreign field (however, of course curiosity is fun and we do stroll into a strange topic once in a while). House utilities engineer, most likely will find little joy in reading about dichotomous branching. Usually people are aware of their specialties as well as extent or limitation in their knowledge in one field or another. Access to the Internet, fosters our sense of being competent in a great variety of topics by the means of numerous pictures and short brief flashes of information. This is only the surface, consequently lacking the depth of understanding an issue. Expressing one's opinion about a topic without a deep understanding of the topic is insignificant. Asking people specializing in the field more questions for your own personal understanding of the topic you seek to explore, seems more constructive. Pain people feel about being misunderstood online is perhaps because the appropriate audience was not invited but instead a lot of passbyers with merely an awareness of the topic flood the unlimited internet comments space.
