It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Please read the whole thread before hitting reply!!!

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:03 AM
link   
Sorry, but just have to have a rant here! I am fed up with reading a thread only to find several pages later a post where it is obvious that the poster has simply read the OP and clicked "Reply" without having read any of the other responses!

One such example from the other day, was a thread where the OP had added two links to a video, the first being a promotional video about the main footage, the second being the actual footage pertaining to the thread. The first couple of posts queried the first link, the OP pointed them in the direction of the actual footage and then re-posted the link to the actual footage in two separate posts, on the first page...Just to make sure that everyone reading the thread could access the relevant footage. The discussion about the footage then commenced. Three pages later a poster then posts a diatribe about why is it just a promotional video, and that he'd like to see the actual footage!!!!! What the heck did this poster think was being discussed for 3 pages? It was clear that they had not read a single comment on the the thread apart from the OP and it annoys me that someone hopes to contribute something useful without having read a single thing that anyone else has to say!

I see this a lot, a very notable example recently was in the 65+ page long "time traveller" thread where the mantra of "but there were not any phone masts or satelites" argument appearing so many times that I reckon if you added up all of the posts that pointed that out, it would probably have amounted to about 10 pages of the 65 of people just pointing that one thing out!!! Clearly they hadn't actually read the numerous other posts on this aspect or they probably wouldn't have needed to point it out again, and again, and again.....

I don't post very much, as I prefer to read and gain an understanding and believe that I have two eyes, two ears and one mouth - and that I should use them in those proportions (and yes I know I have 8 fingers and 2 thumbs, but am substituting mouth for fingers as they are my voice in a forum such as this!)

I'm sure that posters have complained about this before, and someone will no doubt link me to a thread where this has been discussed and accuse me of being lazy by not using the search facility lol but in an effort to deny ignorance and make every post count, I do wish that people would just make the effort to read before they post!

That is all - rant over!




posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:04 AM
link   
I had to hit reply without reading the OP. I just had to! It's an OCD thing...


~Heff



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:06 AM
link   
reply to post by destination now
 


Welcome to the interwebs where instant gratification on ones self righteous rage or attempt to prove knowledge comes with a compulsory need to hit reply button.

Same problem with a debate. It's just people waiting their turn to speak and not a true discussion.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

I had to hit reply without reading the OP. I just had to! It's an OCD thing...


~Heff


Oh you...



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:11 AM
link   
reply to post by lordtyp0
 


Yes, I know, but annoying nonetheless...I'm only on my high horse about it today because the last three threads I've contributed to in the last couple of days had glaring examples of it, and they were not even long threads, but I'm sure I'll get over it lol



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by destination now
 


Now that I have read your OP, I do agree and Zazz's time traveller thread is a prime example! I actually made a drinking game out of how many times a new contributor would come along and say "But there were no cell towers in 1928" in that thread, out of sheer boredom one night. I lasted about 45 minutes before I had to go lay down!


The next most annoying trait is reading a reply and knowing that it is based upon the thread title and not the actual OP (Yes I did just do that, but only because the thread title in this case honestly warranted it! Some moments are just too tempting to pass by! But I pray your forgiveness for my little bit of fun.). If you pay attention a few members have taken to naming their threads the opposite of what the OP states just as a means of showing how often posts are based upon thread title alone and prove that the poster did not read a single word before replying.

All in all I don't mind it though, as a posters credibility quickly fades when they make a habit of demonstrating that they are not engaging, and merely reacting. It doesn't take long for folks to become accustomed to ignoring certain avatars and their input.

~Heff



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:22 AM
link   
reply to post by destination now
 


true but its a free country to coin the phrase and it's realistic to expect some people to do this and trollers do what trollers do. And are you so wise to see all outcomes? Who knows, sometimes its the blind who see most clearly, then again the post you referred to sounds rubbish (IMHO). For example the Buddha clearly teaches how to reach awakening but who really knows about it, not many I would guess and his knowledge has been taught to many many people, I've only just grasped it in the last month or so.

Peace

Give you a hint, the 4 noble truths and the 8-fold path.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Should be CDO cause then its alphabetical.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


I forgive you lol.... and you are right about the thread title, was having a steam coming out of ears moment when I posted it and couldn't think of anything more appropriate!



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 05:55 AM
link   
reply to post by destination now
 

I don't post a whole lot and I do agree with you, but sometimes if you are late into a thread with 65 pages your brain shrivels after a few pages of off topic dross - so if you find the op interesting it's tempting to just sample a few pages here and there maybe the last 2 then hit reply if your input isn't just repeating what another poster has pointed out.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 06:18 AM
link   
For a newbie to a thread, reading through 65 pages of bickering and off-topic crap is just... Unappealing, it would be great if one of the veterans of said thread would post a summary of what has happened every 30 pages or so. Maybe creating an unofficial policy to bring this through would be good.
edit on 19-11-2010 by Somehumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 06:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Somehumanbeing
For a newbie to a thread, reading through 65 pages of bickering and off-topic crap is just... Unappealing, it would be great if one of the veterans of said thread would post a summary of what has happened every 30 pages or so. Maybe creating an unofficial policy to bring this through would be good.
edit on 19-11-2010 by Somehumanbeing because: (no reason given)

Can I star and flag this? It's a great idea.
Perhaps the top post of each page could be the summary with an update every so often.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 07:15 AM
link   
I was a member of a social board once that this was so prevalent that we started a game about it from a rant thread such as this. The title of the thread was: "Isn't it funny how no-one ever reads posts?" The premise of the thread was that you either repeated something someone said from just a couple of posts up. Or you came up with something completely random and unrelated to anything else in the thread. The rules were really made up as we went along. Kind of like "Calvin Ball rules" if you know what I mean.

For example, I could have easily posted: "The OP is obviously using an iPhone App to perpetuate a Hoax."
Or: "I think it's a bird." Or "I don't have time to read the entire thread, but this has to be CGI." I guess you would have to have been there, but it really was a lot of fun.

Years ago, this type of lazy posting got really bad at Television without Pity too. In fact, the Admins added a rule about it in their TOS. If a member got 3 strikes for doing this type of thing, they were given a time out on the board. If they came back and did it again they were perma-banned. The explanation for this was that if someone didn't have the time to keep up, they didn't have the right to waste anyone else's time. Worked for them and saved the Mods a lot of time.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 07:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Somehumanbeing
For a newbie to a thread, reading through 65 pages of bickering and off-topic crap is just... Unappealing, it would be great if one of the veterans of said thread would post a summary of what has happened every 30 pages or so. Maybe creating an unofficial policy to bring this through would be good.
edit on 19-11-2010 by Somehumanbeing because: (no reason given)


Whilst I agree to a point, the threads I was referring to were only 2-3 pages long, not that much of an issue to just read the whole thing. The long thread I gave an example of though had references throughout to the phone mast issue though and I'm quite sure that landing on any page would have given an example of that. What I tend to do though is skim through the multiple page threads, ignoring the chaff and hopefully getting a good idea of what has already been said, though I am aware that sometimes you can miss something that someone has said and end up repeating it, that's not so much of a problem, but the "time traveller" thread was just ridiculous with the number of people saying the same thing

But what I find most annoying is those that only read the OP and nothing else before responding



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by SunshineLaws
 




Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about - and what a brilliant example, sounds like a fun game!



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 08:58 AM
link   
It was! We all really came up with a bunch of crazy stuff. It became the start of the Administration of Crazy Posts group. Ah, good times.

One thing that you didn't mention in your OP is something that I find related and equally annoying. As much as there is a proliferation of people that do not read threads, there is an equal number that do not check forums before they OP a new thread. The redundancy of same topic threads around here is astounding.


To illustrate my point, check out the Off Topic: Movies forum. Yesterday I checked two pages back of this forum to see if anyone had started a discussion about the movie Cowboys & Aliens. There was nothing there. I gathered up the movie synopsis, a trailer and a clip I found about the cast. The last post was this morning at 6:49am CST. So guess what? Someone else started a thread about this movie in the same forum at 7:56am CST. Couldn't they have checked first? My thread was at the top of the Forum Topic List. There is no way they couldn't have seen it if they had bothered to look. Is it just an attempt to gain more flags? Why do people do that? I really don't get it.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 09:25 AM
link   
I agree and it annoys me a lot!

I saw a thread yesterday where people were crying hoax yet all they had to do was read the thread, less than 5 pages, and their questions would be answered. It was posted more than once and yet people still attacked the OP. I gave up.....

I dont think many people even read the full OP in some threads...it's obvious and that too annoys me.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by mblahnikluver
 

Either you didn't read the posts in this thread or you are a comedic genius. I'm not sure which, could go either way.



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 10:38 PM
link   
Was my post too awkward for anyone to address, or am I really a thread killer? [Don't answer that, I'm being rhetorical. :heh] I truly didn't intend to offend anyone. That is why I brought up a personal experience as an illustration, the OP of the duplicate post? Think abject lesson here. That was my intent anyway.

Check the time stamps on these two threads to read for yourselves.

Thread I started on 11/18/10 in the Movie forum:
Cowboys & Aliens

The duplicate thread that was started on 11/19/10:
Cowboys and Aliens July 2011!

The fact that the OP of the second thread posted directly after me was priceless. Well, in a Pythonesque way.

Hey, have I mentioned that I have a wry sense of humor yet?



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 03:08 AM
link   
reply to post by SunshineLaws
 


Yes, duplicate threads can be a problem too, I notice that the mods are usually quick to jump in to the newer thread and say already being discussed here, with a link to the original, but I imagine with the huge numbers of threads and postings they can't catch them all.

Why does it happen? Same reason as before, some posters just can't be bothered to read or research, a thought comes to them and they just click the button, whether it be reply or new thread.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join