How many of you read the whole thread before replying?


PDA






Smaug
April 25, 2004, 11:26 AM
I just read the thread below where the thread starter's wife threw a cig. out the window, etc.

After about 10 replies saying it's bad to throw butts out the window, the original posted said: "OK, point is taken by now." (or something to that effect)

Lo and behold, there were at least another 7 or 8 posts of people commenting on how his wife should either not do that or quit smoking. To me, that is sure irritating.

Does this forum have too much traffic, so that people can't be bothered to read all ther responses before replying?

I thought it was ironic, that people were commenting on how inconsiderate it is to throw a butt out the window, but were not considerate enough to read the whole thread before giving their $0.02... ;)

I come from Glocktalk, another great set of fora but with about 1/4 the traffic of this one. While I do love the responses and great information, there are a LOT of posts here with tons of the same comments because people don't read them...

If you enjoyed reading about "How many of you read the whole thread before replying?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
XLMiguel
April 25, 2004, 11:32 AM
Depends. If it goes on for pages and pages, is really interesting, and I have something new to add, I'd probably add my $.02.

If it's deceased equine flagilation, or if someone (often several someones)has already made the same point I would add, I don't bother.

Werewolf
April 25, 2004, 11:33 AM
You should have included a "USUALLY" response.

For me I usually read the entire thread to make sure someone else hasn't already stolen my thunder so to speak.

Occassionally, however, a post will push my buttons so hard that I don't really give a hoot if a hundred others have already responded in exactly the same way that I would. In which case I respond without reading the rest of the thread.

swifter
April 25, 2004, 11:57 AM
Yup, shoulda had a "usually"...

And I usually don't post unless I have something to say that hasn't been said...:scrutiny:

Tom

larry_minn
April 25, 2004, 12:00 PM
I normally read entire thread. At least skim responses. Keep in mind there are about 5 people on my ignore list. IF I don't have time/care to read responses but leave reply I will preface it with "Haven't read all responses but ....."

Pheonix
April 25, 2004, 12:03 PM
Usually, but if there is a poll sometimes I will only read the poll and the original post.

ceetee
April 25, 2004, 12:42 PM
I find that unless there are just a few posts, sooner or later somebody always makes the exace same point I would have made. Sometimes I feel like I could have made the point more eloquently, but hey, the point's been made. If that's the case, I don't bother posting at all.

laynlow
April 25, 2004, 01:02 PM
To be honest, I don't care what most people on boards like this think. I normally look for the people I know to be intelligent and read their posts. I find that to be a more valuable use of my time. I rarely chime in on debatable topics.

Like you, I get very tired of all the nanny posters.

WhoKnowsWho
April 25, 2004, 01:49 PM
I try to read it so I don't repost the same response or continue the same line of thought after the thread starter has essentially ended that train of thought.

Josey
April 25, 2004, 02:32 PM
I read that same LEO enconter post. I felt sorry for the original poster. I felt sorrier for those who kept whining. Pitiful. I didn't respond to that post due to all the whining.

Kamicosmos
April 25, 2004, 03:44 PM
I always read the full thread before posting. One reason my post count is low, often times after reading the thread, I don't have anything else to add that hasn't already been said.

I've never been much on the 'Me Too' posts...

7.62FullMetalJacket
April 25, 2004, 03:51 PM
Well, if you don't read the whole thread, you may miss a coupla turns and end up in Perth Amboy :rolleyes:

tcsd1236
April 25, 2004, 04:09 PM
I usually read the whole post. Unless I have been away from the board for a few days, I catch the threads when they are fairly new and am able to follow along as the thread develops.

Kharn
April 25, 2004, 04:26 PM
Most of the time, I read the first post, skim the rest for anything interesting and then add my two cents. Sometimes, I just reply right off the bat from the subject line. That can be either good or bad, so I try not to do that too often. :D :o

Kharn

labgrade
April 25, 2004, 05:00 PM
Having not read all the posts to this thread, I had to vote "not usually." :D

Seriously though, some threads catch my attention through thread-starters, implie subject matter, or - depends. Too, being somewhat infrequent lately, wading through 6 pages of stuff can be a bit much for the time constraints.

& too, some posters I agree with to such an extent that they have more eloquently already described my views, while others push buttons to no end - which will elicit a response toot sweet.

Standing Wolf
April 25, 2004, 05:01 PM
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

redneck2
April 25, 2004, 06:32 PM
if some of the responses are along the line of the old Richard Nixon quote..

"I know you believe you understand what you think I said but I'm not sure you realize what you heard is not really what I meant"

christophera
April 25, 2004, 10:14 PM
Man that's stupid. Why would you throw a cigarette but out the window.:D

Viking6
April 26, 2004, 11:40 AM
I didn't read all of these. Generally, if it calls for an opinion, I may read others first or not; if it calls for information, I try to look at all posts so as not to be redundant. If they're really long or I'm time strapped, I may just fire away. No harm, no foul.

vega
April 28, 2004, 07:25 PM
Me, I just based my answer on the last person's comment. ;)

vega

BluesBear
May 1, 2004, 04:28 AM
YES I always read the entire thread IF I am going to post.

I feel it's only fair to read what everyone else has said if I want someone to read what I say.

Besides I don't want to be accused of beating a dead horse, which is what happened in the thread mentioned in Smaug's original post.

On those threads that by the time I get to the end of the second page, it's clear that it's nothing more that a urination competition, I just close the thread and go to the next one. At my age I no longer feel the need to write my name in the snow.

voilsb
May 4, 2004, 03:10 AM
I read the whole thread before posting, and if my point or perspective has already been made I tend to simply not post it unless I think it warrants repeating.

atek3
May 10, 2004, 03:05 AM
haha. I made a sarcastic post, and someone didn't get the sarcasm so below I pointed out the fact that I was being sarcastic. Then a guy writes a one page rebuttle of my "arguement" because he didn't read the whole thread...jeez.

Then I started another thread that started drifting into a drug war debate WHICH THE THREAD WASN'T about. I told people, "not the thread, go to this thread" and they kept argueing. Very annoying. I almost wanted the moderators to close the thread.

atek3

c_yeager
May 10, 2004, 03:25 AM
I always read the whole thread so as not to simply repeat a point that had already been stated better previously. I really HATE it when people don't bother to read the other posts first. The result is a bunch of folks making the same point over and over again. Which is particularly annoying when that particular point has been resolved.

on the other hand though After about 10 replies saying it's bad to throw butts out the window, the original posted said: "OK, point is taken by now." (or something to that effect)

Simply calling "time out stop getting on my case" really isn't fair either. If i say or do something stupid i expect it to be made clear. And it's not fair for me to say "i give up". If i couldnt handle a substantial amount of criticism i wouldnt be posting on a forum.

BluesBear
May 10, 2004, 04:10 AM
If i say or do something stupid i expect it to be made clear, But the point is that HE (the poster) didn't throw a butt out of the window. His WIFE did. Or at least she attempted to. Call his house and preach to his wife if you feel you have to whine about it. But don't keep hammering at him for something that he didn't do. Especially since that wasn't the focus of the thread.

c_yeager
May 10, 2004, 04:45 AM
But the point is that HE (the poster) didn't throw a butt out of the window. His WIFE did. Or at least she attempted to. Call his house and preach to his wife if you feel you have to whine about it. But don't keep hammering at him for something that he didn't do. Especially since that wasn't the focus of the thread.

I don't think i actually posted on that thread, nor was i reffering to it in a specific sense. Besides I throw cigarettes out the window all the time, so there :p

Antlurz
May 11, 2004, 07:24 PM
I normally read the entire thing first, but have found that many times, on a hot topic, before I get it typed out and posted, half a dozen others have got in ahead of my post.

Ron

griz
May 17, 2004, 09:48 PM
I read the whole thread first. The only thing that irritates me more than somebody who hasn't bothered to read the thread first, is somebody who starts spouting off before they read all of the first POST!

By the way, does anybody else see the irony of the people that this thread is addressing will probably not read much of it?

If you enjoyed reading about "How many of you read the whole thread before replying?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!