ceigered:

Chainy:I don't mean to offend you in any way, but I think one can objectively say that you have a tendency to burden your messages with all sorts of random thoughts which happen to be swirling around in your head at the time of writing. You often make no attempt to express yourself in a clear and concise way. I find this disrespectful to the readers of the forum. They are forced to either completely ignore your messages, or somehow patiently sift through the waffle.

Well, I apologise.

I do find it strange though that you find my form of writing disrespectful while you are telling me to relax, and then calling my writing waffle. While then saying I make no attempt to express myself clearly or concisely (on the contrary, I'm very aware there are improvements that could be made, and I burden myself over them every time something comes out of my mouth or is typed on a screen).

Indeed I do tend to have very random, disordered thoughts, but perhaps that might just be because my brain works differently? I'm not forcing others to read what I say, they are allowed to ignore it, and if they do care about what I've said, I try to clarify and narrow the point to what they're talking about.

But I find it hard to believe that I should be faulted for, god forbid, having a different brain, a different style of communication, and for being a different person who doesn't seem as efficient nor as concise as you. (I was, after all, practically deaf for about 1 and a 1/2 years of my childhood when others would normally start speaking, thus losing that development).

Chainy:Ceigered, will you please relax? If you read through this thread again you will notice that I actually understood the situation quite well.

But you said you didn't understand?

Well Chainy and Ceigered, personally, I like both of you. I enjoy reading your contributions, and if something (from you or anybody else) gets too lengthy, too "random", or just doesn't hold my interest, then I either just skim past it or skip it altogether--I don't feel "disrespected".

It IS true that gathering ones thoughts and pin-pointing ones answers in a more succinct reply is often both more effective and easier to read. I often try to delete verbosity from my own posts (sometimes unsuccessfully) before hitting "send"--it's good to try to sum things up. That makes it more likely that the posts will be read.

However, I like considering other possibilities that spin off of original questions. Rather than being "waffle"-brained, I think we language guys tend to be more "spaghetti"-brained---one strand leads to another, which makes us think of something else-- HA! And away we go on another tangent.

In summary--a little advice about making our posts more readable and succinct is okay, but let's be tolerant of one another's style as well. And if you're going to "duke it out" with one another over something, please consider taking it private.

Being able to express oneself succintly is a valuable and relatively rare life skill.

But that is, of course, a different issue to wandering off topic, which can sometimes lead a thread down interesting byways.

La publikiga firmao faris gazeton nur el amuzaĵoj, por fari profiton. Bedaŭrinde, ordinaruloj aĉetas gazetojn por lerni multe da aferoj pri la mondo. Pro tiu ĉi stranga situacio, la homoj aĉetis la gazeton tiamaniere ke novaĵojn ili ne povis legi.

I would propose that translation. I agree with Sudanglo that "so that" has different meanings, which seems obvious to a native french speaker looking at the examples.

En la other example:
"The man bought a newspaper, so that he could read the news"
I would translate
"La homo acxetis gazeton, tial li povis legi novajxojn"

Altebrilas:En la other example:
"The man bought a newspaper, so that he could read the news"
I would translate
"La homo acxetis gazeton, tial li povis legi novajxojn"

Tial = therefore / so (and can also be used as a conjunction 'and therefore')

The Esperanto sentence you give above would have this meaning:

"The man bought a newspaper and therefore he could read the news"

If you want to say 'so that' then you'd use 'por ke'. Simple as that.

Take a look at these:

Li aĉetis gazeton por legi la novaĵojn = He bought a newspaper to read the news.

A longer way of putting it:

Li aĉetis gazeton por ke li povu legi la novaĵojn = He bought a newspaper so that he could read the news.

By the way, I've deleted some of my comments in this thread.

Ceigered, you were bold enough to offer an apology, so I feel that I owe you the same. I want to support the good-natured atmosphere here at Lernu, so I am sorry that I criticised you so harshly.

I apologise to you Chainy too, and sorry for being so defensive and jumpy at a lot of what you say, when you do have good points.
Vivu la amikecon, por ke la batalado ĉesu?

Regarding the slightly off-topic "tial ke", perhaps a better example is "La muregoj falis, tial ke la malbona (or malvirto/mava for more poetic effect) milito feliĉe invadis"

The walls had fallen (or simply "fell"), therefore the evil army easily invaded.

Could that above be rewritten as

"La muregoj falis, do la malbona milito feliĉe invadis"?

Or does that "do" have a broader meaning? "tial ke" seems to have a stronger relation between a cause and a result than "do" has, which seems more like "something happened, and for whatever reason that led to something else happening".

Chainy:

Altebrilas:En la other example:
"The man bought a newspaper, so that he could read the news"
I would translate
"La homo acxetis gazeton, tial li povis legi novajxojn"

Tial = therefore / so (and can also be used as a conjunction 'and therefore')

The Esperanto sentence you give above would have this meaning:

"The man bought a newspaper and therefore he could read the news"

If you want to say 'so that' then you'd use 'por ke'. Simple as that.

Thank you, it is an opportunity to improve my english too.
"The man bought a newspaper so that he could read the news and therefore he could read the ads too"
Is that correct?
"La viro acxetis gazeton por ke li povu legi la novajxojn kaj tial li povis legi ankaux la reklamojn"
Of course, it can be said in a simpler way. But I wish only to know if I use correctly Therefore/so that.

Altebrilas:"La viro acxetis gazeton por ke li povu legi la novajxojn kaj tial li povis legi ankaux la reklamojn"
..I wish only to know if I use correctly Therefore/so that.

You are correct; tial and por ke do mean respectively "therefore" and "so that".