Do you ever read a piece of social or political commentary and feel impressed by the writing but still wholly unconvinced by the arguments? It happens to me quite a lot when I'm idly surfing some of the more mainstream stuff rather than my regular blog visits. I think it applies to a certain type of professional, or would-be professional writing.
You begin reading a well-written piece, skipping over a linked reference because you don't have the time or inclination to read two pieces at once. Then you skip over one or two more references, trying to swallow the thread of the argument, which is still well-written and quite persuasive, but something within you is filling up.
It's like eating too much rich food, the flavour is still there, but the appetite wanes. Suddenly you call a halt, you know you've had enough. Maybe you reached the end of your meal of words and maybe you didn't, but you won't be swallowing any more - not for a while anyway.
Too many assumptions.
Adrift on a sea of words, conjectures and assertions which could never be proved in any practical sense. Yet it's a well-written piece and you are not sorry to have read it, even though some of the links and references have more than a whiff of name-dropping. But that's it - the piece has no impact on you.
Too much baggage.