I am possessed by a myriad of... unusual affections. Let us be reductive and say that I have a lot of unusual opinions (though it doesn't really mean the same thing). I could just do low-effort SoL denpa-post anywhere in the internet in any format, but that really isn't very convincing at all. Unstimulated, people quickly click off a video, or a post, or just zone-out or leave when you are talking to them on street, or that very cool book slides of the editors desk into the floor for lack of exchange value. One could in fact argue that discourse lacks tellos, and as such, does not desire to be convincing at all.
But let us forget the ontologies for now, let us just say that I want to be convincing. Let us also admit that there is a certain amount of effort that goes into "dressing-up" such "opinions" in order to make them "attractive" do be discussed or even "looked at"; therefore, just denpa-posting mindlessly into the atmosphere might be cathartic but ultimately useless, not just politically, not just social, but in terms of the bare associations that occur between us and the other people who inhabit the world (even before the youtube algorithm was created the socius (society as structure) had already created (itself as) the algorithm of _communication_).

Therefore, if I want to be convincing, if I want to associate myself with my fellow humans a certain extraneous _effort_ needs to go into my communicating. However that effort is not _sufficient_ condition of convincingness, merely _necessary_ condition for such a thing. Many a-time people won't listen to you simply because they haven't been pandered to enough, or they simply aren't in the mood to be stimulated and are inside a (temporary or not) rot cycle, and a myriad of other things wholy disconnected with both the affections (""opinions"") in themselves and _effort_ put into their communication with others.

However it still appears to me that such a effort is still worthy. And in fact it pains me much that my strength is not (by a long mile) enough to insuflate with effort even 0.001% of all the intercourse I desire with the world around me. It is obvious in fact, that we are merely shaken by the winds of time, and dependent on so many extraneous factors that one does not obtain what one desires, but more likely, lucks out into what one desires.
And if that which one desires is _rare_ and in _great quantity_ (at least in comparison with the great majorities in the world) how much is convincingness worth.

It is clear now to me. That convincingness is just charisma, is just attractivity (senso lato), and some people are born uglier than others, and some people wish more than others, irrespective of their beauty. Yet the world's beauty and ugliness surpass us, mere humans, in every way.

I fear that my affections will remain.... unconvincing.

[Personal note, I wrote this just to cope with the _crap_ youtube video I've been cooking up for the last 4 months...... my denpa masterpiece I composed it many years ago, and now I need to hit it big, my NEETING license is about to expire, and the thing I desire the most slips ever away, and I believe (stupidly maybe) that if I hit it big, I might just have it]

convincing to whom? for what purpose?
if being convincing (period) is the goal, then just say the same things everyone else is saying in the same way or take a marketing class.
convincing with words is pretty well nearly impossible. you will only ever be able to "convince" people who already 95% agree with you. not even the ambivalent will be convinced without more than words and effort.
in order to convince, the object of conviction, or it's ends must be desirable and demonstratable. the object might be the act of communication itself (this effort you speak of, 4 months toiling is that effort visible to a casual observer?) but then there is the line dividing gaining attention and convincing. to convince anyone you first need their attention sure, but they aren't the same. the effort alone can grab attention, but if that effort isn't speaking to the same thing you intend to convince one of then it's truely meaningless.

>>2
I have forgotten to specify that the "convincingness" I speak of is not the "dictionary form", I also did not intend (meta warning) to be convincing in my monologue on convincingness.

That being said I believe that the "to whom" which is sub-intended in the text is quite obvious, that "whom" is the other in the most general sense, and for "what purpose" that is also discussed in the section where I mention the "tellos" of discourse, this is to say, for no purpose other to be "convincing" (in this fuzzy, general sense of the word).

In philosophical terms I do not believe that a object of conviction (might its form be prepositional or otherwise) is necessary for the act of "convincingness" to "act" in the most general sense of the word.

to convince anyone you first need their attention sure, but they aren't the same

This has been answered in the following passage:

However that effort is not _sufficient_ condition of convincingness, merely _necessary_ condition for such a thing.

Thank you for the reply!