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.