Well, we can at least assume that emptiness does not enhance understanding except in specialist philosophical contents:
Let A be the set of information understood by the OP in reply a and B be the set information understood by the OP in reply b. If B-A is empty then b does not enhance the understanding of the OP of a. I agree that we may not directly know what B-A is because B and A are in someone's mind, but if we observe that b-a is empty then this implies B-A is also empty. Although language philosophers might come up with some weird exceptions - these anyway cannot be considered the intention of b.
One world, one people
In reply to Re^4: In support of downvoting plagiarism
by anonymized user 468275
in thread In support of downvoting plagiarism
by anonymized user 468275
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |