If I see a title or OP in, say, the Pit which I immediately form an opinion about - Is it bad form if I post my opinion without first reading every reply to the OP?
Considering that a person’s opinion is unlikely to change, and that even if the many replies have shared the opinion, the point is that the opinion belongs (also) to me, so my posting it is like saying “me too”.
For example - I saw the OP for “Michael Moore cleans up his act” in the pit which said he was formerly “A disgusting slob”. My immediate reaction was that this was a grossly inappropriate term and that MM was merely a casually dressed bearded American, and that there was nothing ‘disgusting’ about his appearance (or his opinions IMO)
I have a related question. There was this thread in the Pit calling Michael Moore a “digusting slob”. I immediately thought this was out of line, and that Moore was nothing out of the ordinary in his dress or facial hair. Would it be all right for me to post to the thread without reading any of it?
Whoops. Apologies for the duplicate thread. The other one is the ‘finished off’ one. I stupidly clicked ‘submit’ before I had finished, and even more stupidly thought I’d get away with halting the seemingly unposted thread to finish it off.
Har Har smartypants. There’s a big difference between my point and yours. In mine the OP has been read. You talk about reading nothing at all before responding.
Okay, seriously, I think it’s always a good idea to read through the replies. In your example, it could be the OP had already had his ass flamed off for the “disgusting slob” remark, and he sincerely apologized. After that, good-natured discussion continues, until you bring up the withdrawn remark again for no reason.
I’ve seen this happen in more serious and personal cases, stirring up bad feelings in matters already settled. How will you know unless you read the whole thread?
I find it annoying when people post to a thread and it’s very easy to tell that they haven’t read the previous replies. That seems rude, like you don’t care enough about what others have to say to bother reading their input. But it’s something I can usually get over.
And yeah, IMHO Michael Moore looked like a disgusting slob. I mean, the dude looked like he really, really needed a bath.
Discussion about Michael Moore’s appearance is NOT appropriate for this forum.
On the question of whether it’s OK to respond in a thread without reading it, I pose to you the following analogy:
You’re sitting around with some friends having a discussion. Another person (let’s call him Fred) walks in after the discussion has been going, walks right in, sits down, and immediately says something without having heard what the other people have said. Fred just marches in and speaks up. What do you think of Fred?
I suspect that most of you would think that Fred was a jerk, that it is rude to butt into a conversation without spending some time listening.
Firstly, read the whole thread for the sake of others. If you repeat almost exactly what someone said earlier, you bore us.
Secondly, for your sake. Consider this: A person posts “position X” in the thread and you skip over it. Perhaps that “position X” (which you did not read) happened to satisfactorily answered a question, or maybe it led to a heated debate, or maybe it was soundly debunked. What do you think you will look like if you come along with a post that repeats “position X” (or even says the opposite without acknowledging it). You will look like a first class fool.
This also aplies to reading links, especially if someone posts a link saying, “the definitive seven wonders of the ancient world can be found in this link <linkety link>.” Now imagine you coming along, without reading that, and post, “I think the seven wonders are… (incorrect list from faulty memory).”
Boy, will you look like an ass if you do something like that. Expect even your own Pit thread.
So, bad form? Yes. Rude. Potentially social suicide. And hella lame.
When I see a post that duplicates something that has already been posted in the thread, I assume the poster is either kind of stupid (can’t remember what they just read) or rude/a self-centered ass. What makes a poster’s opinion so special that we should read it when he/she can’t be bothered to read our opinions? You ain’t Cecil, honey.
I like Dex’s analogy. I have a personal rule to read the entire thread before I post. If a thread is long and I don’t feel like reading it all, then I just don’t post. I figure if I want people to read my posts, then I should be willing to read other’s posts.
There are exceptions, in my opinion. Some threads in IMHO are intended as polls or informal polls. In such cases, identical posts by separate posters are still worth having. Also, in MPSIMS, a significant number of threads are started with posts that can be summarized as “Hurray! I have a new (job)(husband)(baby)(cat)” or “Boo hoo! My (grandma)(wife)(cat)(neighbor) died”. In such cases, one should perhaps scan for updates by the original poster or someone else, just in case things have changed or more information has been provided. Otherwise, additional expressions of sympathy or encouragement are generally welcome, without investigating who else has responded or what they have said. Of course, I’m not sure that "I’m sorry"or “I’m so happy for you” count as an opinion exactly.
I’ll offer a slight variant on Dex’s opinion, with reasoning.
It’s only a matter of courtesy to review what’s been said to date before adding your own opinion – particularly if it would merely echo what was said by someone else.
However, like all matters of courtesy, there can be exceptions. For example, let’s say there’s a thread on issues of health, and one of our resident physicians logs onto the board only with an hour or so to spare to read the threads which interest him. Suppose the thread in question has already accumulated 62 replies when he sees it. Would it be reasonable for him to read the OP and then respond to it, coming back to it at a later time when he has more time to spend on line? I’d think so.
Every so often, I’ll make a fact-based on-topic post to a long thread, specifically saying that I haven’t reviewed the entire thread content yet but wanted to correct a misunderstanding of the facts in post #15. I don’t see that as offensive – it’s dealing with a particular point.
Sometimes a thread is just asking for an opinion: What is your favorite type of cookie? In this case, just jumping in and saying Girl Scout Thin Mints is acceptable.
However, in the Pit I have frequently seen an OP based on a news article. The article shows a person to be a great jerk. However, sometimes another poster will point out how biased and factually incorrect the article was in the first place. So jumping in and saying “This is an outrage” after it has been shown to be, in fact, not an outrage, will only make you look like a fool. YMMV
I’d go with Zebra - in GD, it can be bad form, particularly if you are responding to a posted opinion that might be retracted or modified on the next page. Or you might be posting an argument that has already been roundly whipped.
But in poll-type IMHO stuff, your opinion is simply stated regardless of what anyone else has said