Subjective is right. It is not poor writing, just old fashioned. Many 18th and 19th century statesman and writers used what you deem to be, ''fluffy'' language. Would you consider them bad writers? I may very well get, 'marked down' on a colloege paper had I chosen that route, however, save for some grammatical errors theres not much justification for limiting ones verbal expression.
There is a difference between how they write and how you write. Refer to the sentence I picked at in my last post. That is not poor writing because you are mimicking an older style, but rather because you have used too many words that add no meaning to the sentence. This is only compounded by the fact that you conjoined two ideas without contributing any significance as to why. "I love my vocabulary" and "I learned to improve my speech in prison" are two concepts that are independent from each other, and should not be conjoined into a single sentence without significance as to why they are dependent. This can be achieved for example by creating the idea that "i love using my vocabulary when speaking publicly in prison."
Being deliberately long winded is not "old fashioned" its just poor writing. Sorry to break it to you.
It will greatly assist in my consideration of your words if you could explain further why a sentence about elocution, and then a follow up in the same sentence about vocabulary (which I feel are inherently connected) is poor wording and/or grammatically incorrect.
Because they are not inherently connected ideas.
Take for example the following, bike riding and wearing helmets. one is associated with the other in a similar fasion as speaking and vocabulary. Part of speaking is vocabulary, and part of bike riding is wearing a helmit.
The following sentence is improper because it is a conjunction of two complete independent ideas. "While at summer camp I learned to ride a bike, and I love wearing a helmet." These are not sufficiently connected to prevent this sentence from being awkward.
A better sentence would have been, "I loved wearing my helmet while i improved my biking skills at summer camp"
Or if you wanted to use a conjunction i could have said, "While at summer camp i learned to ride a bike, and while doing so i also learned i love to wear helmets."
There needs to be a direct connection between the two, they cannot be two independent ideas, even if they are relating to the same subject. Your sentence was missing a connection between the two conjoined ideas, you cannot merely join them because vocabulary is related to speaking, you must reference how your love of vocabulary influenced your prison stay.
That being said i have lost my interest in that particular sentence, and its merely a grammatical mistake that i have only seen you make once. The real issue with your writing is that you have tons of words that add nothing to what you are saying. I am not talking about emotion or specifics. If you feel the need to include extra descriptions of those who support you, that is fine, and not poor writing. But phrases such as "I do so love" are inapropriate outside the realm of fictional writing. You may like the way it sounds, but i can tell you from personal experience that it is not a good writing practice. In a nonfictional setting anything in your writing that detracts from the message is not a good thing. Overly fluffy language is no longer used because it has no place in nonfiction, it slows down the exchange of ideas and causes focus to be diverted to the writing itself rather than the ideas of the writer.
It is fine if you choose to continue to write in this style, but only so far as you do not believe that this style is a good style for a nonfiction forum.