Why reply without reading the thread???

[Anonymous]

I'm really trying to understand why people reply to posts without reading what's already been written beforehand. Oftentimes, the OP comes back and adds clarifying info that really impacts on how I might have responded. You can see dozens and dozens of people here taking up their time and ours by repeating verbatim what others have already written. It's bizarre to me. And no, you can't just skip these repeats because you have to first read them to determine that they're nothing but a repeat.

Recently I posted about my negative views about people who do X, only to be chastised for 6 pages with people who mistakenly thought I was advocating for X. I even wrote a follow up post right away to make it clear that I am opposed to X, but apparently, nobody bothered to read it. I don't understand the point of participating in a listserve thread if you're not going to bother reading it.

I'm NOT talking about the people who preface their comments with "I'm dashing off now and can't read all of this, but here's my quick input that might address OP's question."

It makes me wonder if these people don't listen when talking with someone else in person.

[Anonymous]

I agree, but reading comprehension is not a mandatory skill to participate on the Internet. It should be...

[Anonymous]

Sorry, if the thread title is a question, then sometimes I just answer the question without reading the details.

This is why, when I create a thread about something a little complex, I don't put the question directly in the title, and I make an effort to write clearly and concisely, without all the relevant points.

[Anonymous]

WITH all the relevant points. Can't even respond correctly, now

[Anonymous]

For very long threads, I don't always read every single page, but will usually read the the first and last 2-3 pages so that I'm not jumping into a weird part of the conversation. I'm sure I sometimes miss some key data point, though. But I do try. And if the thread is 5 pages or less, it usually only takes a few moments to read through the whole thing.

A lot of people on here don't read very critically and plenty of others don't write very clearly. There are enough that do to make it worthwhile, but yeah, the people who are just oblivious are frustrating. Especially when they clog up an otherwise interesting conversation with irrelevant points.

[Anonymous]

I understand your frustration, but think you’re being unreasonable.

If you start a thread and ask for advice or opinions, I may have something potentially helpful to say, that I’m happy to type out. But reading 8 pages of other people’s advice or opinions on this matter isn’t interesting to me. So I type out and submit my answer. If that answer is unhelpful to you because it doesn’t take into account your other posts, feel free to ignore.

But since this is obviously happening to you enough that you’re irritated - take that as a clue that you need to be more specific and clear, with all relevant details, in your initial post.

[Anonymous]

Because people here are wildly insecure and so desperate to prove that they have some incredibly wise thing to say and race to say it before anyone else does that they skip anything but the title.

[Anonymous]

I only read OP's post. Not interested in people's responses.

[Anonymous]

OP here. This is mainly a critique of the responses to other people's posts. And I don't think those OPs's posts are especially vague or poorly written. It's the responders who are the problem.

[Anonymous]

"I only read OP's post. Not interested in people's responses."

So you think of a forum like this as a two-way conversation between you and OP? Do you think the OP's look at it this way too? The thread is 40+ distinct 2-way conversations with OP as one party and each commenter as the other?

[Anonymous]

I didn't read this thread before replying. I don't understand why you and other people on this board think people will abide by your "rules".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree, but reading comprehension is not a mandatory skill to participate on the Internet. It should be...

This. And I actually think that's what some people find appealing about online forums. They can spout off without listening to others or considering different perspectives or pausing to reconsider their initial interpretation. Oy.

[Anonymous]

Your annoyance by this is silly. Not everyone has time to read every single post about a topic before responding. They read through a few and then try to give useful advice.

[Anonymous]

I'm replying right now based only on the title. And I'm guessing I disagree with whatever you posted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Sorry, if the thread title is a question, then sometimes I just answer the question without reading the details.

This is why, when I create a thread about something a little complex, I don't put the question directly in the title, and I make an effort to write clearly and concisely, without all the relevant points.

This.