Elmer Fudd and Bugs Bunny. Best cartoon I’ve ever seen.
The problem is that the DWW/FG comment isn’ t actually all that far off the mark, IMHO (even if it does get repeated a lot). So not really quite the same as what’s being discussed here, I think.
Well, now you know it offends you’d be well advised to stop doing it. 
Seriously though, as has been said, it depends on the nature of the thread. Some topics (“What’s your favourite beer?”, for example) it’s fine. Others (“What should I do in [Situation]?”) can often be context sensitive or have their nature changed by the addition of later information, so it’d be good manners and prudent to read the whole thread first, IMHO.
I can’t believe no-one has mentioned the CS ‘Critique my sitcom’ thread! It’s a perfect example of why this sort of thing is sometimes acceptable.
Can’t be done (except of course in the sense that you can make a thread discussing all and only the older threads which don’t discuss themselves), no more than you can make a thread with more posts than in any thread. And there’s no barber like the one you were about to describe either. Neatly cuts the paradoxes off at the start, doesn’t it? 
The only difficulty is when you start having reason to think it should be possible to make such objects, but I certainly lack such an intuition for threads and barbers…
Do you know about heterological words?
Yes, I find that antinomy rather more troubling, there being greater intuitive reason to suppose the ability to make such a paradoxical definition.
Indeed. It is a wonderful thing
Cool, I’ve never won a thread before!
Sorry for the confusion. I was in a weird mood before I left for work.
Yep, that’s it.
Spoilsport. 
I’ve read the whole thread, but I just wanted to say that I don’t have anything to say.
I think one of the best things you can do is to go ahead and type your response, if you feel you must say something. Then go through quickly and make sure it hasn’t been said before. And, if you still feel the need to say it, just acknowledge the other person.
I don’t think it’s hard to read the first few posts, skim, stop to read any clarifications by the OP, read the last few posts so you know their still talking about the topic, and then say what you want. Sure, you may double someone else, but it’s not going to happen that often.
All this said, I don’t get the ire. There are enough times that people are deliberately rude to go out and get mad at people who don’t realize they are annoying you.
See, now if you’d actually read the thread you’d have realized that most people used the words ‘minor’, ‘annoying’, and ‘I just ignore them’. There wasn’t any actual ‘ire’, as in anger.
And I have read everything in this thread except this post, but I agree with it.
Regards,
Shodan
This sentence is the first sentence in a self-referential post. The third sentence clearly states that it doesn’t care about any other posts or the OP. “I don’t read/care/understand/or want to understand the OP or any other poster because this is a self-referential post.” This is the last sentence of this post.
The following sentence is true. The preceding sentence is false.
I read every single post in this thread before I responded (intentionally making sure I didn’t skip a single one), and you couldn’t tell. Kinda funny how some people say it’s so freaking obvious when that happens. Maybe the person you are talking about just reads things differently than you.
I can play this game, too: If you’d read the thread, you’d notice that, before the thread got derailed towards the end, there were at least 8 people (I just RE-counted) who were really acting upset. And obviously I was talking about them.
I still can’t get over the fact that I made sure each of my points had not been quite made before, and I still get told I didn’t read the thread. Why should I if people are going to assume I didn’t anyways?
ETA: Besides because of my OCD.
Sorry to upset you, on review, I see I left out a smilie after that reference to reading the thread, it was said in humour, not in earnest. Of course, without the smilie, that’s impossible to see, my bad.
I do stand by the fact that most posters pointed out it was minor and annoying however. Not exactly ire, in my opinion.
As the OP and someone who just now reread the thread, could you list those 8? Because I count, maybe, one - Cat Whisperer got his/her rankles up a bit responding to Starving Artist. But that’s it. Everyone else reads as if they’re annoyed, but certainly not “really upset”.
That’s how they did it in the fifties?
I just want to agree that this bugs the crap out of me too.I’m an active member of close to a dozen forum sites and this one is by far the worst in this regard. I may have even started a pit thread on it years ago. If I can’t be bothered to read the whole thread, I just don’t post. I hate re-reading the same point from 5 different people.
But, yeah, I should probably just get over it.
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.