This thread is a fantastic example of a failure for people inside a hobby to even begin to imagine how to explain it to someone outside the domain who expresses a casual interest in a nuance of the field. The poor person who asked for a definition of 'hypertapping' was given:

> tapping/hypertapping: what you do to your mouse trying to get your click speed above 10 CPS

Now imagine for a second that you have, as someone not engaged in the higher levels of professional competitive video gaming, never considered measuring click speed in 'CPS', nor considered how one might get it above 10. You would have no idea what you do to a mouse to accomplish such a thing, so you're none-the-wiser what 'tapping' or 'hyper tapping' actually are (or what the nuanced distinction between them might be).

Can you see how they might be confused?

Then they were told that 'rolling' is

> The equivalent of putting sharpied electrical tape on your mouse and rubbing it.

Again, not having ever considered sharpieing electrical tap, nor what effect it might have if one were to put it on a mouse and rub it (static buildup and a loud squeak possibly?) what is our poor non-elite-gamer to make of this explanation?

Now you're telling them that it doesn't matter how this input rate speed is accomplished. And yet it seems apparent that tapping, hyper tapping and rolling are all nuanced and distinct ways to accomplish this.

This is why people learn not to take an interest in other people's hobbies.

A monad is just a monoid in the category of endofunctors, what's the problem?

Genuinely

Didn’t everyone memorize Deleuze? (Joking)

I really appreciate this! I enjoyed reading it for sure and totally agree!

In an effort to be accessible it’s often lands as hard to read cause so much is assumed.

You nailed the point though, so communication happened if maybe more circuitous than optimal