Actually, can you point to an example from my comment history that was ad hominem? Also, I do not know how pointing out my comment history proves a point that my arguement was difficult to understand. They seem irrelevant of one another and I do not know how you can say tou are making this as a point unless you explain the connection.

The line from the essay I used as an example was not an example of the over usage of synonyms but an example of how you had three consecutive sentences that did not readily appear to grow upon the idea of the last but introduced a new aspect to the paragraph. Typical structure of a single paragraph should be to focus on one idea and explore it and grow upon it. Otherwise it is confusing as in your paper.

I will try to explain my meaning of the synonym metaphor, again. First, here is an article explaining the point I was trying to make,

https://medium.com/the-writers-woodshed/just-say-said-69766700568c

In regards to how it relates to your paper, I believe it would be easier to understand and, critically, enjoy if you did not go to such pains to use uncommon wording and phrasing.

Edit: did you downvote my comment history?

Edit edit: I just looked at my comment history and there is ONE example recently that I forgot about. To be fair, in the context of the comment thread it was not really an arguement and only loosely fits the definition of ad hominem because of this. It was quite imaginative if I do say so myself.