Forum Administration > Forum Announcements

Reading the thread?

(1/19) > >>

cbcb:
I'm still unclear on whether there is a specific rule about poster's reading the thread before posting. I'm talking about instances like this:

OP:
--- Quote ---My cat is having difficulties finding the litter box. I have tried the "crate-retraining" method, but it was not successful. Does anyone have suggestions?
--- End quote ---

Responder:
--- Quote ---Try the "crate-retraining" method.
--- End quote ---

Or times where a question is answered, but still comes up again and again (as if posters are reading only the original post and none of the subsequent discussion).

I've been at other forums where there is a "read back X pages or X days, whichever is longer" rule, but don't think I've seen this clearly/specifically addressed here. Apologies if I've missed it when reading the rules.

Frostblooded:
In the forums that I visit, including this one, I use Greasemonkey scripts made by myself to ignore posts of people I do not wish to see. I don't wish to be forced to read the posts of people that I do not want to. If a thread has veered a little off or into food parties, I feel I should be able to ignore those kinds of posts and post my own opinion/whatever to the thread. I think people are going to make mistakes, and that's all right, the OP can clarify or doesn't have to respond. I personally don't think this is necessary and hope it's not the case.

Just my two cents.  :)

cbcb:
Just to clarify, I didn't mean to advocate such a strict rule, but just mentioned it as an example. I'm more irritated by seeing instances of my first example - which I think of as "I didn't really bother to read your post, but here are my thoughts on the subject generally and without regard to potentially important details you carefully outlined". It seems so rude - like, why did OP even add details if they're just going to be ignored?

I completely agree with you that there's nothing wrong with posting about the original topic even when other posters have veered into food party/tangent mode.

MDefarge:
This issue has come up before and it seems like there are 2 *very* distinct trains of thought 1 - it is rude to post without reading all the way through (for the reasons you gave ie people don't realize things are being repeated/the OP has already said the won't work/OP has clarified something) 2 - posters who say that "you can't dictate the way other people post."  I do not believe a consensus has ever really been reached.

jimithing:
I'm not exactly how you can enforce a rule, making posters read the entire thread. I definitely think it's rude not to. But sometimes, details get missed.

And frankly, if a poster clearly hasn't read the thread, I think that it only makes them look bad and posters can see that they haven't been reading.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version