i think it depends, a person can ferret out lots of info on SN from the archives and also ask questions, and i dont think people are too harsh, but there is a difference between having a deep understanding of something and being able to effectively communicate that.
Like maybe we need a stacker Richard Feynman type.
Other than that, imo the reason you might have learned more on X could be linked to the learning concept of plus, minus, equals.
So basically, to effectively learn something, you need a plus (someone better than you to teach you), a minus (someone who knows less than you to teach), and an equal, someone on your own level to go back and forth with. + - = is perfect for marital arts too btw.
So by having to constantly explain or correct the tards of X , you have been reinforcing your own knowledge and have been writing down your thoughts, which has the benefit of also helping clarify thoughts.
And now you have the bonus of being far more knowledgeable about lightning.
i think it depends, a person can ferret out lots of info on SN from the archives and also ask questions, and i dont think people are too harsh, but there is a difference between having a deep understanding of something and being able to effectively communicate that.
Like maybe we need a stacker Richard Feynman type.
Other than that, imo the reason you might have learned more on X could be linked to the learning concept of plus, minus, equals.
So basically, to effectively learn something, you need a plus (someone better than you to teach you), a minus (someone who knows less than you to teach), and an equal, someone on your own level to go back and forth with. + - = is perfect for marital arts too btw.
So by having to constantly explain or correct the tards of X , you have been reinforcing your own knowledge and have been writing down your thoughts, which has the benefit of also helping clarify thoughts.
And now you have the bonus of being far more knowledgeable about lightning.
just my 2 sats