Replying here because this matched my train of thought well.
I'm actually really curious to know if anyone has first-hand knowledge of a tinkerer (by this blog's definition) getting their work published.
As the GP said, understanding the rules is one thing, but demonstrating their understanding is another. And as you said, matching the style seems to be more important than the value of work that is demonstrated.
I see the value in matching terms, jargon, style etc just so the reviewers can standardize their thought processes. But as someone who's been a tinkerer for ages now it's hard to change styles for no immediate benefit.
I'm actually really curious to know if anyone has first-hand knowledge of a tinkerer (by this blog's definition) getting their work published.
As the GP said, understanding the rules is one thing, but demonstrating their understanding is another. And as you said, matching the style seems to be more important than the value of work that is demonstrated.
I see the value in matching terms, jargon, style etc just so the reviewers can standardize their thought processes. But as someone who's been a tinkerer for ages now it's hard to change styles for no immediate benefit.
Maybe some examples will inspire me to try :)