Should you read an entire thread before responding?

[Retro Red]

Galb & Daibhidh O'Baoighill have already done a fine job of illustrating one of my primary reasons for reading an entire thread before responding - it increases the odds of finding something that I can make a pun out of or a humorous comment. (As if this wasn't already well known.)

.

[O'Neille]

Well then most posts should have about two responses. One for and one against. I agree with both on this issue.

[walkerk]

HAT!

[SteveB]

I do read every post in a thread before posting. I also read every post in a greeting thread, as well as read the personal profile (if any) so that I may tailor the post to fit the person I am addressing. On many other threads, I read the profile on a poster I do not know. I do not wish to antagonize anyone on this forum. ( Maybe the Moderators might be an exception. ) It has become too important to me to do that. I have my gaffs, and have been advised by the party, usually by a PM, or a Moderator, to which I am thankful.
There is much to learn here on threads old and new. We all have, by being here, agreed to Hank's rules. When a poster is marginally bending from them, I prefer not to post anything in that thread. If it bothers me enough, the Moderator that is on is in bold type on the home page, and can get a PM. We all have a responsibility to monitor our little neck of the internet. In the very short time I have been here, I have typed many posts, as I enjoy the discussion that is our forum. If I do not post, either I have nothing to say, (unlikely) or something doesn't quite add up IMHO.

[Alaskan Kilted Guy]

Nope, I didn't read this one either. Sometimes it is best just to express your initial reaction to a topic or post, rather than have it be tainted by reading everyone elses posts.

[SexyButler]

Now after reading the whole thread I don't feel the need to reply.

Bingo!

Seriously...
I think people should feel free to make the choice that fits them best.
Kilt forums should fit like a kilt, not pants.

No one should feel silly over a forum post.

[The F-H.C.A.G.]

I read this entire thread before posting (but not before voting-can you guess which way I voted? )

Just to prove I've read it (and to annoy the heck out of my husband)...

I wonder why this poll was created

Like I said in the other thread that I just revived, I do think it's a good idea to read an entire thread before chiming in.

1. You may say something that someone has already said.
2. It's respectful to not only the thread starter but to everyone that has contributed to the thread.
3. Threads has a huge tendency to dramatically change as time goes on, and the thread may have started one topic, but have grown into an entirely different genre. If you only read the first post, your comment may have nothing to do with what the thread is about anymore.

My rule of thumb is to read the entire thread. If there are >100 posts in a thread I will at least read the first page and the last page to try and figure out if I am interested in the content of the thread and how things have progressed. Then I will go back and read the entire thing before chiming in.

Just my two cents.

Yep, I agree entirely. Very good points you've made here Ayin.

...snip...

The only exception to this is a greetings thread I think.

...snip...

We all find out later how this works out don't we?

...snip...

Often, when I am reading a thread, there is a comment I want to make, only to not post it because someone has said the same thing later in the thread.

...snip...

Just because someone has said the same thing doesn't mean that you can't contribute the same opinion, just phrased differently!

This is what I use as a guideline:

If a thread asks for OPINIONS, I'll read the entire thing to see if someone else has replied similarily to how I feel. If so, then I usually will forgo posting to avoid repetition.

If a thread asks for advice AND I have the knowledge AND no one else has posted a suitable answer, I'll reply.

If I think a thread may benefit from an injection of my "off-kilter" sense of humour, then I'll reply. I enjoy nothing better than bringing smiles into our forum.

I try to remember that reading requires less brain power than forming thoughts and then writing them out. If I'm going to strain my mental capacities, the result should be of value.

I'm going for a nap now.

Most of the time, I do exactly what Big Mikey does, but today I am making a point about how I read this thread and therefore am quoting 75% of the posters and, in this way injecting my "off-kilter" sense of humor.

That's a good rule. It's always nice to listen to what someone is saying rather than blocking them out by thinking of your response and missing half of their comment.

It's also nice to feel like someone has really been listening rather than thinking of what they want to say and missing the point.

Man, do I sound married.........

That's because you are married, I hope?!

Why on earth would anyone read something all the way through before responding? That is not the way humans react in this day in age. but then, I have an excuse. I'm unmedicated ADHD.

It's called Ritalin. I hear it works. Talk to your health care provider.

I voted "no," though I almost always DO.

If someone asks for opinions, I'll give mine without reading the dozens that precede it.

Let's face it - by skipping posts, we're not missing great literature in most cases.

Hey, what about MY great literature?

Before I start reading a post I always check the start date and then proceed through the entire thread. I will admit that I do go through it rather quickly, and have to sometimes go back to pick up things I have missed. When I do screw up its generally when I think I'm at the end of a thread and there are more pages that I didn't see. What I really hate doing is posting in the middle of someone posting pictures.

Yeah, we picture posting folks hate that.

hey, 4 pages of stuff, am I going to read it all, don't need to to make my point

You're missing a lot-there's some pretty good stuff in those 4 pages most of the time.

I voted for reading the whole thread. If I want to respond to an early message and haven't finished reading the thread yet, I usually earmark stuff as I go along and use the quote-plus button, which snags the messages I'm reacting to and assembles them into the editing box when I hit the "post reply" button.

I also have a habit of using the "Preview Post" button to not only see how my composition looks, but to see if someone beat me to the punch.

Regards,
Rex.

I always knew I liked you Rex! Must be why Jamie likes you too (I hope! )

I always try to read the whole thread--usually somebody has already contributed what I was about to say, and said it better, accounting for my low ranking for having been around as long as I have; I try to add someting substantive instead of a "me too" so the discussion stays fertile and concise.

I don't mind old threads being resurrected when someone has new information to offer--they may not have been around at the original discussion, and it shows their interest that they root around for all our previous wisdom. In fact, would that more people did such research before bring ing up a question that has been thoroughly beaten to a pulp.

Me too!

HAT!

Pith helmet?

Nope, I didn't read this one either. Sometimes it is best just to express your initial reaction to a topic or post, rather than have it be tainted by reading everyone elses posts.

Yeah, whatever.

Bingo!

Seriously...
I think people should feel free to make the choice that fits them best.
Kilt forums should fit like a kilt, not pants.

No one should feel silly over a forum post.

You know what, if you don't read what's already been posted, you DO run the risk of looking silly. But, just MHO.

And, by the way, I haven't read any of the posts that may have happened while I was posting this. My apologies.

Be well,

[Makeitstop]

It is always recommended that you read through the whole topic. If it's just a page or two you really have no excuse not to. However, I do think it is less important with certain topics.

The deciding factor is whether or not the topic was likely to change during those overlooked posts. Most general topics will lead to a few tangents but won't stray so far that a post on the original topic is inappropriate, and that is often quite helpful to keep things from wandering too far.

For posts about personal experiences and other topics which are not universal or theoretical, it is important to make sure that there isn't some new information or clarification which changes things dramatically.

For topics which are little more than lists, such as "what do you guys do for a living?" it is not necessary to read every response, as it is extremely unlikely that my job will be changed by one of the posts.

If it's a thread asking for advice, it's always important to read all the way through, as the answer may have been provided and the matter long since settled. And of course, the original poster may have also posted since with more information. For example, when I first got here I asked for advice about the various UK models, and someone referred me freedom kilts. I explained that I didn't really like their style (something which has since changed) and that they were way out of my budget (Something which has not) and yet, people kept pointing me to FKs, until the wizard himself told them to knock it off.

I could go on like this, but I think everyone who has read this gets the general idea. There are many factors which can be used to decide whether or not it is likely that a post on the original topic might no longer be appropriate, so really, if you don't have the time to read every response on every thread, at least make sure you read enough to be certain that your post is relevant.


A few other things:

I didn't vote either way, because there was no "It depends" option.

It's a good idea not to repeat what everyone else has already said, but it is ok to state your agreement. It's not uncommon for threads to become de facto polls, in which there a usually two sides on the issue at hand, and each response is essentially a vote.

Ritalin is ok, but Modafinil is great. For anything. Well, anything but insomnia.

Previewing before posting in order to make sure no one has said anything new is always a good idea. Just like you should always copy before posting, just in case.

I keep my display options set to display 20 posts per page instead of 10 because I find it easier to read through and respond to long threads. I would set it higher, but it takes too long to load.

On another site I used to frequent, everything is bare bones, with little more than plain text and so I could keep my display options set to 50 posts per page with no problems. It was amazing to see just how quickly 85% of the people got completely lost, and how all the important points made would evaporate after about 10-15 posts. Sometimes it seemed like I was the only one on there who read anything but the last page.

[Mipi]

Well, everyone should do as he/she likes, but I think I can realy make any good contribution to discution without reading what was previously written (at least glimpse reading made)

[Livingston]

My vote was yes. BUT, of course, on this post I did not. Many threads may have already had questions answered, been warned by a moderator, or something that would render your post redundent or changed what you would have posted. Kind of like jumping into a conversation that is almost over and receiving that "where have you been?" look from everyone.