# "I haven't read the thread yet, but..." **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 2, 2010, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985 "2010-03-02T13:53:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2010, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/81 "2010-03-05T17:39:53Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > Were my rankles up? I don’t even remember that - let me go look. {looks}That’s interesting; re-reading it, I was never upset about anything. I just realized that I had said something that was unclear, so I tried to clarify it. Good lesson here - never assume that anyone reading what you’ve written is on the same page as you. 🙂 Eh - I thought it might have been a stretch. Yours was the closest reaction to ire in here. So we’re down to zero. One if you count brewha actually using the word “hate” (followed up with “I should probably just get over it”, of course). ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2010, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/82 "2010-03-05T17:50:27Z")
So I guess the rather tepid response in this thread means I don’t have to worry about it all that much if in the future I just want to toss something out for consideration without having to marry the thread first? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Lestrade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Lestrade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lestrade)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2010, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/83 "2010-03-05T17:59:57Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > Eh - I thought it might have been a stretch. Yours was the closest reaction to ire in here. So we’re down to zero. One if you count brewha actually using the word “hate” (followed up with “I should probably just get over it”, of course). No, my hands were trembling with disgust as I wrote my first post. I was hurling office supplies and screaming with incoherent rage at **Starving Artist** ’s gall and presumption. I just forgot to add the smiley, so I guess only people with OCD were able to pick up on my ire. ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2010, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/84 "2010-03-05T20:09:26Z")
> [@tacoloco](#): > > Oh shut up. I’ll bet you didn’t even read the entire thread. Shame on you. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2010, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/85 "2010-03-05T20:48:24Z")
Well, it is kind of a silly thread. (The original point is a good one, though - don’t come into the middle of a conversation, blurt out your opinion, and leave in real life or on a message board). ---
**Author:** ![Nzinga\_Seated](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b5ac83/32.png) [@Nzinga\_Seated](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nzinga_Seated)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2010, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/86 "2010-03-05T21:04:29Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > Well, it is kind of a silly thread. (The original point is a good one, though - don’t come into the middle of a conversation, blurt out your opinion, and leave in real life or on a message board). Can I blurt out my opinion and stay? ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2010, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/87 "2010-03-05T21:09:46Z")
Sure. Doesn’t bother me at all. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Robson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gary_robson/32/3448_2.png) [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2010, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/88 "2010-03-05T22:19:05Z")
I probably notice the OP’s issue more than most, being a moderator. Some days, it seems like every long GQ thread has at least one person piping in at post 88 to say the same darned thing that someone said in post 47. Then the meta-discussion begins… “Dude! What am I, invisible? (See post 47)” “Well, it’s better to get the right answer twice than not at all!” Et cetera. Et cetera. Et cetera. > [@tdn](#): > > I remember being involved in one thread that got pretty inflamatory by the end of page one. Early on in page two, misunderstandings were cleared up, and it became a pretty friendly thread. On page three, someone piped up with something really inflamatory. I said “Hey, did you even bother reading page two?” He responded with “There was a page two?” > > It was pretty funny. It tends to get pretty confusing when people do that (talk about pages in threads). The funny here could well be that he was right. To _him_, there was no page 2. You see, each person can set how many posts are displayed on a page, so a thread with 107 posts would be three pages long to someone with 50 posts/page, two pages long if they show 100 post/page, and one page long if they show 200. > [@KarlGauss](#): > > All threads either discuss discuss themselves or they don’t (e.g. _this_ thread discusses itself). > > Okay, how about threads that don’t discuss themselves. Put all of _them_, and only them, into one big thread (cut and paste if you wish) and call that the ‘thread of all threads that don’t discuss themselves’. Does the thread of all threads that don’t discuss themselves, discuss itself? Discuss. What if thread A discusses thread B, and thread B discusses thread A, but neither thread discusses itself? They’d both go into the new big thread, at which point it would become self-referential. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2010, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/89 "2010-03-07T03:42:42Z")
> [@Nzinga\_Seated](#): > > Can I blurt out my opinion and stay? For you, yes. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2010, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/90 "2010-03-07T12:12:18Z")
I agree with the OP. The SDMB is definitely not the worst forum for this kind of thing. I post on another forum and, as an example, there is a thread there which currently has 1909 posts. It discusses an air accident (the Dash 8 at Buffalo, NY) and every few pages someone blurts out, “I haven’t read all the posts but [insert something discussed to conclusion on page 3]”. I understand that you don’t want to wade through nearly 2000 posts to see if anyone has brought up your point, but you know what? The chances are damn near 100% that someone has brought up your point at least 10 times, so if it’s so long that you can’t read it, perhaps take it as a given that it’s long enough that your point will already have been raised, you’re just not that original. As pointed out earlier in this thread, it can be particularly annoying when you have gone to great lengths to prove a point to someone only to have someone else bring up the same thing again. ---
**Author:** ![Lestrade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Lestrade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lestrade)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/91 "2010-03-08T15:42:42Z")
[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:88, topic:530985”] What if thread A discusses thread B, and thread B discusses thread A, but neither thread discusses itself? They’d both go into the new big thread, at which point it would become self-referential. [/QUOTE] There’s a more elegant solution. Create a thread to discuss the big thread, before the big thread has been created. Note that this has already happened. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/92 "2010-03-08T17:31:47Z")
> [@Richard\_Pearse](#): > > . . . it can be particularly annoying when (someone has) gone to great lengths to prove a point to someone only to have someone else bring up the same thing again. [The current GQ thread on calculating pi](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=554900&page=2) may take the cake for this. It not a particularly long thread, having ‘only’ around 60 or so posts, but even so, one of them manages to say something for the 7th time (including two posts only four and five positions above theirs, and on the same page)\*. \*None of the six overlooked posts were mine, btw. No, I was ignored somewhere else in the thread, twice mind you, but on a different matter. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/93 "2010-03-08T18:58:49Z")
Honest to Buddha, I’m not just saying this to be a dickhead, but I haven’t read this whole thread, however I do want to make a point and that fact is semi-material. I’ve been on vacation / moving / without internet for about a week and a half. It’s goddamned hard to catch up here. Sometimes you just have to dive in head-first into page 9 of a thread and hope for the best. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/94 "2010-03-08T20:08:19Z")
> [@Lestrade](#): > > There’s a more elegant solution. Create a thread to discuss the big thread, before the big thread has been created. Note that this has already happened. We have a culture here of not rehashing stuff that just got well-hashed, and maybe that isn’t a great thing. Maybe the people who missed out on the first hashing would like to get in on the second hashing. And now I’m hungry for hash for supper. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/95 "2010-03-08T20:08:49Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > It’s goddamned hard to catch up here. Sometimes you just have to dive in head-first into page 9 of a thread and hope for the best. No you don’t. There simply are not that many 9 page threads. You don’t NEED to catch up, and you don’t NEED to participate in every thread. If it looks like an interesting thread, why wouldn’t you want to read the 9 pages? What do you have to offer if you DON’T read the 9 pages? Do you think people want to hear your contextless dismembered opinion on something that’s been aired 12 times already? Just start a new thread or limit your clicks on threads that have less than 50 posts. It’s really not that difficult to do. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/96 "2010-03-08T20:25:33Z")
Fuck that. If I want to contribute I will. Sometimes I read every last post, sometimes I don’t. It a particular thread grabs me by the boo-boo and I feel like pontificating I’m not going parse every sentence in it before I feel confident enough to type a few lines and hit enter. Especially if I haven’t had a chance to read every post for a week. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2010, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/97 "2010-03-08T20:56:42Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > Fuck that. If I want to contribute I will. Sometimes I read every last post, sometimes I don’t. It a particular thread grabs me by the boo-boo and I feel like pontificating I’m not going parse every sentence in it before I feel confident enough to type a few lines and hit enter. Especially if I haven’t had a chance to read every post for a week. So to answer the question(s) posed… You DO feel like people want to hear what you have to say when you don’t care about what they say, even if what you’re saying has been said 12 times before. Nice. I bet you’re a blast at parties. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2010, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/98 "2010-03-09T13:37:10Z")
It’s a friggin’ message board. Where I write messages. I’m sorry I don’t have the hours and hours it would take to read every last word posted here, but that sounds like it’s more of a “your problem” then a “my problem.” Put me on ignore if you don’t want to read my ramblings. ---
**Author:** ![elbows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b3f665/32.png) [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2010, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/99 "2010-03-09T15:06:46Z")
I don’t really mind it that much as long as they preface their remarks with “I haven’t read the thread yet, but …”. That way, no one has to come in and say, “We covered that in post 12, by the way.” Everyone who finds it annoying can just skip over your post and move on to the next. I mean, if you can’t be bothered to read the discussion before jumping in you won’t really care that no one can be bothered to listen to what you’re saying or address that you’re repeating something that’s already been said. Clearly there are straight, “What kind of soda do you prefer?” threads where no one cares. But where there is actual discussion, why bother posting without bothering to be on top of the back and forth of where the discussion has reached? I mean it will be more than apparent to everyone involved that you’re too ADD addled to be able to engage with, or too arrogant to be worth engaging, or too rude to bother actually discussing anything with. So why bother? If you think that what you’re contributing is worthwhile, then why would you want the other posters you’re trying to engage to think you’re a simpleton who can’t be bothered to read the up thread? ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2010, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985/100 "2010-03-09T16:43:06Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > It’s a friggin’ message board. Where I write messages. I’m sorry I don’t have the hours and hours it would take to read every last word posted here, but that sounds like it’s more of a “your problem” then a “my problem.” Put me on ignore if you don’t want to read my ramblings. Jack - I’m sorry if I’m coming across as hostile, but I think you’re misunderstanding me. I’m not telling you to read every last word posted here. I’m asking why you would want to add something to a conversation that you’re not interested in participating in. If a thread seems interesting enough to post to, why isn’t it interesting enough to actually read? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-havent-read-the-thread-yet-but/530985.md?page=6)