GP is hitting against limit of expressiveness of sequential text. Stacked parentheses work when the flattened sentence still reads correctly, but in this case, GP has a graph-like thought, in that:

  in (most of the times <this> (or deeper)) style

is supposed to represent a graph, where "most of the times" and "or deeper" both descend from "this", and "or deeper" also descends from "most of the times". A DAG like that can't in general be flattened without back references (which would be meta-elements in the text, something natural writing generally doesn't do) or repetition, and the latter will lead to non-grammatical sentences, especially as you trim the DAG down to reduce detail.

Also: while I'm not the guy GP references, I am a guy that does that too - or rather did, at some point in the past, until I realized there's like 5 people in my life who could understand this without an issue, even less who'd indulge me or enjoy communicating this way. So over time, I got back to writing like a normal person[0]; I guess conformity is just less mentally taxing.

--

[0] - Mostly - I still use semicolons and single-depth parentheses a lot, and on HN, also footnotes.