Do you read long posts thoroughly?
0 voters
After a hard day’s work, I read some of the posts, but I do not read long posts thorougly. I simply skim through them. I personally think concise posts are much more fun.
Yes
Your poll’s lacking the simple Yes/No option otherwise I would know what my options were right now.
Depends on the poster, frankly. If the post looks poorly organized or begins with a spelling or grammar mistake, then no. Why should I care if the writer doesn’t? :shrug:
Some posters though, imo, merit careful reading.
BTW, I never vote in poorly constructed polls here. (I don’t read Cosmopolitan, either, so that kind of marketing doesn’t work much on me)
[quote=“flike”]Depends on the poster, frankly. If the post looks poorly organized or begins with a spelling or grammar mistake, then no. Why should I care if the writer doesn’t? :shrug:
[/quote]
How about the fact that, as I said before, the only chance many of us have is when you’ve reached the end of your tether at the end of the day?
That is an interesting question kieth and one that brings to mind a range of philosophical problems related to time and it’s constraints (attended a funeral today so time and it’s constraints weigh heavily upon my mind… if you have ever seen a dead person, or indeed ever imagined one, you might be inclined to empathize, but more on that later) as well as questions related to relative value and quality and so forth.
For how can we be certain that a post is worth reading until after we have read it? And by that time it is surely too late as it will, someday, be for all of us (we all thought gramma looked pretty good considering) and as we look back on this long and squalid life the question might perchance arise “Was it a waste of time reading all of fred smiths posts?” Could that time have been better spent elsewhere? But of course you see this really is the crux of the matter since a person might be inclined to ask these questions NO MATTER WHAT he has done with his three score and twenty…
That’s as far as I got.
That’s as far as I got.[/quote]
I read the entirety of your post five times, because it was nice and concise. Be laconic, be like the Spartans.
That’s as far as I got.[/quote]
I read the entirety of your post five times, because it was nice and concise. Be laconic, be like the Spartans.[/quote]
Brevity can’t shut the stable door after the milk has been spilt.
That’s as far as I got.[/quote]
I read the entirety of your post five times, because it was nice and concise. Be laconic, be like the Spartans.[/quote]
I had to look up laconic but thanks kieth. I do try.
[quote=“Namahottie”]Long posts should be redirected not to the flounder thread
but to this place
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ[/quote] I’d like to know why you think that as most of the people who post really long stuff usually have something interesting to say and often say it well. But maybe that’s just the stuff I read. I don’t spend much time in the IP or Technology forum. They would likely get a wider audience here than in a blog if the post wasn’t floundered.
What do I know though? I only read stuff that I’m interested in and haven’t stumbled across a blog I want to look at on a daily basis. Reading a blog often feels naughty and is much like reading someone’s diary. You often have to go through a lot of mundane stuff to get to the good bits.
You should be wrapping that rascal, no?
[quote=“Matchstick_man”][quote=“Namahottie”]Long posts should be redirected not to the flounder thread
but to this place
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ[/quote] I’d like to know why you think that as most of the people who post really long stuff usually have something interesting to say and often say it well. But maybe that’s just the stuff I read. I don’t spend much time in the IP or Technology forum. They would likely get a wider audience here than in a blog if the post wasn’t floundered.
What do I know though? I only read stuff that I’m interested in and haven’t stumbled across a blog I want to look at on a daily basis. Reading a blog often feels naughty and is much like reading someone’s diary. You often have to go through a lot of mundane stuff to get to the good bits.[/quote]
I could be racking up points for being put before the Star Chamber commette…But there is one particular poster who has a lot to say, generally interesting, but nonetheless, the word succient isn’t in their vocabulary…Hence why I said check out the ZZZZZ.com
I stopped (tried to anyway) posting long posts after I realized I rarely read long post.
---- (Don’t read anything past this line, it’s a waste of time, like most long posts)
Something else I do is try to bold main points and stuff, to make it easier to read. I also like to start new paragraphs as often as possible. Doing things like these tend to help me read longer posts so I try to do that when I post a longer post.
I’ve also noticed that when some people post even short long posts (like bobs post above) and it does not have any line breaks they get hard to read.
That’s why I always try to make line breaks. And I try not to repeat myself. I’ve also noticed that a lot of people repeat themselves over and over again when posting.
And sometimes I like to ramble on and on and on. I believe that nine out of ten posters really like to ramble but don’t like to read that rambles of another rambler. That’s what blogs are for. So, in conclusion, if a post warrents a long reply I’ll read it. If not I won’t. Most posts don’t, so I don’t read most long posts.
Good question.
Agreed.
The funny thing to me is that that post was a five minute wonder begun with no other purpose than to sound loud winded, therby demonstrating Kieth’s point by negative example. Not sure I accomplished that though since he described it as laconic! Anyway when I finished I realized there was an odd sort of symetry to it so spent another fifteen minutes tightening it up.
Not sure what this has to do with long posts…
Hmmm. The word “succient” isn’t in my vocabulary either. What does it mean? And what’s a “commette”? 
That is just not true. I’ll give you my example before you go off flicking to the next post.
I spent my English skill aquiring years looking out the window and wanting to get the hell out of school so missed the basics. I was lucky enough to get back into the system when I was 23 y.o. and with science related subjects there was going to be no major break through in English.
So, I read for an hour a day. Always have, always will. I now have more of a look at the spelling and sentance structure so I can at least get a leg up here and slowly improve.
And to answer the question. I skim long posts then read them thoroughly if they appear to merit further attention. If they look like somebody is thinking out loud then I give them short shift for the same reason you mention.
[quote=“Ironman”]That is just not true. I’ll give you my example before you go off flicking to the next post.
I spent my English skill aquiring years looking out the window and wanting to get the hell out of school so missed the basics. I was lucky enough to get back into the system when I was 23 y.o. and with science related subjects there was going to be no major break through in English.
So, I read for an hour a day. Always have, always will. I now have more of a look at the spelling and sentance structure so I can at least get a leg up here and slowly improve.
And to answer the question. I skim long posts then read them thoroughly if they appear to merit further attention. If they look like somebody is thinking out loud then I give them short shift for the same reason you mention. [/quote]
Yeah, I don’t mean to say that I conclude that all spelling and grammar mistakes necessarily imply that the writer doesn’t care. This can happen other ways as well. For instance, it may be that the writer is in a hurry and doesn’t have the time to be careful. Not only that, but we’re all merely human and mistakes - especially grammar - come with the territory.
That said, life’s too short to spend time sorting through poor writing. The odds of finding the odd pearl are far outweighed by the sheer waste of time. We all have choices to make, after all.
Sorry.
$0.02