It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What are people that post something dumb, because they havent read the whole thread.

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 12:56 PM
Is their some sort of catchy name for folks that read the OP and then proceede to post, without really catching the rhythm/flow/intent of the thread because they didn't bother to read it.

If their isn't already a name that I'm unaware of, which is probable, I would like to submit for your consideration..........

and yes I too plead guilty, but it will never happen again I promise!!

Quick on the Trigger or QOT's

OK then, what's your idea?

[edit on 9-2-2007 by whaaa]

posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 01:08 PM
Open mouth before reading insert foot.


Okay, so it's not very catchy.

posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 04:03 AM
I guess the obvious, but not so catchy one would be "half-assers"

How about "Turtles"

I suppose that doesn't make much sense to anyone else, but whenever I go fishing at a certain spot the turtles eat my worm of my hook like the minute i drop it in the water. If they would just wait a minute I might get what I was after, but they are in such a hurry to bite that I have to start over.

Okay, fine. YOU think of something that doesn't sound stupid!

posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 07:56 AM
I think it is unreasonable to expect each member to read the full thread before making a reply. Some threads can grow quite large, rather quickly. Members have been known to put a lot into each post, so it could take up to an hour sometimes to read a relatively new thread. By the time we finish catching up, it is time to log off. By the time we get back, there is another hour to read.

I agree though, Members should make an effort to assure their replies are on topic and flowing with the thread. But our first replies really should be directed to the opening post. So, reading the initial post would be suffice in the early going. When a thread begins to grow quite large, sometimes it is appropriate to take into account all of the recent posts.

Often there is more than one discussion going on in a thread. A member and I maybe quoting one another and discussing points. While other members may be quoting each other on their perspective. We may be off-topic to one another, but the greater good is actually being served.

Hell, I'm just playing Devil's Advocate. But I am against stereotyping members with different acronyms. We should be attempting to deter drama, not create it.

"CT'er" has caused enough troubles around here where members get sensitive. We don't need any more, in my opinion.

posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 08:52 AM
Point well taken MrC.

I see the term "you People" used quite frequently.

Maybe that's who they are....

posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 01:55 PM
This is probably dumb, but what if we just nudge them in the right direction that the thread is moving, so we call them nudgers...

posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 02:40 PM


premature retortifiers?

gun jumpers? (guju's LOL)

gotta think about this

posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 05:34 PM
I call them "hit and run posters"....they'll probably never be back to return a reponse either.

Either that or it's a troll looking for prey.

posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 11:33 AM
They are definitely Skimmer’s” for which I am one. If I post something in a long thread to which I haven’t had a chance to read at length, I try to remember to state that I haven’t read it all, and usually I will quote a specific person to whom I’m addressing.


posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 11:36 AM
How about "A Happy Accident" or AHA.


top topics


log in