Weasel words and other vagueness in writing

[Windy_Skies]

Good on you for trying to find support for your practice.

The usage in your link refers to the part I mentioned earlier, bolded here:

@Windy_Skies

If it is clear who the “we” is, the members of your family for example, or the authors of the report, all is good.

You’re not writing a report or article here. You’re also not guiding the reader along like in a math proof. So the way you use it is not supported by your link.

Edit:

@kitefreak

As for scaling, a valved ram-air airbeam is predicted to both out-scale an airbeam dependent on a flying air-pump system, as well as be simpler and cheaper. The empirical evidence is the preponderance of ram-air kites, but lack of self-pressurizing-aloft airbeam kites.

You are trying to guide the reader along here I think. I’d like to decide what I think about the use of the passive voice like you do here in the context of this forum. Is it appropriate since you are not guiding your novice reader along in well-known concepts, and you’re not writing an article describing new research that you have done? Is it clear you’re not referring to some unnamed entity that made the prediction? It wasn’t to me and look where that got us.