Now let me tell you, there are people like me (tons of us!) who want to think, to play by intuition. When I learn new things I don't need to be able to lay down my entire thought process into visible steps nor do I need explicit explanation/rule for every specific situation (in go and also elsewhere). I can "feel" that this is the proper move; I have no need to provide a calculation of profit vs influence vs something else to justify my move.
So when you say
Your advertising of 6 types as too many for the non-pro players is one of the most counter-productive advices one could give to players intending to learn and understand many josekis. Much less counter-productive would be an advice to learn only the types (and their natures), no josekis and develop joseki-like sequences ad hoc during one's games.
it makes me think the exact opposite. So in this case I will argue for the favour of Segoe's advice, and say that it is your advice that is counterproductive. You have way too many categories and the whole list becomes useless for practical use - even if one can always trace back a particular joseki to one of the items on the list. I would never think in terms of such narrow categories when playing - a newbie much less. The fact that you can account for more scenarios does not mean you should.
You should understand that there are people who think differently from you, and that no matter how excellent you think your idea/advice is, it might not be good/effective for everyone.
