I needn't be privy to the phrases of the internecine slander wars; I think I can recognize SimonF's repeated employment of vague "it could be's" as the sort of filler in lieu of having read the substance of your post (or of the original) - but he just wants to pontificate.

There was nothing wrong with your 'coherence', as he claims - yours was a question of whether the original post was merely (the nowadays too-usual) artlessness in speeling - or betrayed quite more than some dyslexic tic. I vote the latter.

Further, the degree of syntax mangling suggests as did you - that nobody who speaks, writes that way could long carry off the illusion of 'professional'. ('Course twixt Shark Tank and live reports here - guess I'd have to believe that some 'clients' couldn't really tell? Maybe he selects well for cluelessness. Or deals exclusively with impressionable freshly-minted MCSEIEIOS who talk that way. Even in bed.)



It's a jumble out there!