very humble nickname you have

Sometimes, it's better not to write everything in too much detail. It's common for things to not be obvious to someone who hasn't encountered a similar "subproblem" before or didn't think about the problem a lot, but it gives you room to solve these "subproblems" yourself instead of only finding out the whole solution.

When I read editorials, I always just read it very briefly to get a rough idea of the intended solution. I just find it easier to think about a solution afterwards, basing my own thoughts on what I remember from that brief reading, than to read properly and try to understand what the editorialist meant exactly.

It is far more wide phenomenon.

There was a book "Joking Physicists" (if I remember correctly) which gave small list of such famous phrases and their real meaning. It goes like this:

• It's obvious — really, we do not know how to prove it, but it looks so;
• Even a fool can see — the explanation of the given fact is so whimsical and we could not reproduce it without making many mistakes;
• It's well-known fact — we think we read of it in some very special article but now we could not find this article and probably it is just a "false memory";
• It was shown by experiment — well, it was not shown — we never succeed in this experiment, but theoretically, probably, it should be so anyway.

However, editorials are usually written by authors of contests and I think you could not at once force them do this better. Probably even not many of them will read your request... :)

goto google & write "it's obvious codeforces"

when i tried it, the first result was this very blog post :D

Is it seem like?