How to get thru long threads?

[cool change]

I just wanted to know how people are using long threads. I want to participate in some of the topics but I dont want to read so many pages. Therefore, I tend to stay away from them as I dont want to repeat anything that has been discussed. Is there a trick?

[Krazy Kruizers]

I, too, have gotten a little discouraged when a thread seems to go on for pages and pages and I don't wish to sit and read page after page just to catch up.

 

Something else that bothers me -- those individuals that always have to quote nearly everything -- just adds more pages to the threads.

[Sea King]

I just wanted to know how people are using long threads. I want to participate in some of the topics but I dont want to read so many pages. Therefore, I tend to stay away from them as I dont want to repeat anything that has been discussed. Is there a trick?

Of course there's a trick

 

don't know what it is but there must be one;)

 

I'd read the 1st, scan the rest QUICKLY (like SST quick) and decide whether I want to "jump into the pool" or "sit at bar":)

 

I'd then search out Sails, Heather, Copper, JH, Krazy and some of the other regulars and get a "feel" for where the "experts" stand

 

then at least 1 possibly 2 libations, click "on" and go for it:D

 

don't worry about repeating anything .. if the thread is that long, most people probably won't remember every detail already said

 

have fun and don't worry .. the worst that can happen is everyone disagrees with you :eek:

[sail7seas]

KK....I know what you mean about the 'quotes' but actually aren't they a help for those people who only want to scan through a thread? If you haven't kept up with it a few posts at a time, isn't it hard to can keep track of who a poster is responding to or what they are commenting specifically about.

 

If my post imediately follows one that I want to specifically refer to, great... no need to quote. But if there are 5+ intervening posts, I think quoting makes it obvious what I'm responding to.

 

[sail7seas]

I'd then search out Sails, Heather, Copper, JH, Krazy and some of the other regulars and get a "feel" for where the "experts" stand

 

Of course, we don't always 'stand' the same way. While I much admire them all, I don't always agree ;) and they certainly don't always agree with me. ;)

[hammybee]

 

Something else that bothers me -- those individuals that always have to quote nearly everything -- just adds more pages to the threads.

 

I am one of those that tend to quote that part of a post I want to address. The reason I do this is to provide a point of reference for the reader. Without it, responses may not make sence, without cross referencing back and forth.

 

The Reverend uses this approach all the time and I have found it helpful, especially when it's a long post.

 

It also allows the occasional acelerated disagreement to be contained between two posters and gives those who choose, the opportunity to realize this and the opportunity to give it a wide berth.

[lougee1043]

some posters copy the entire post (sometimes lengthy) in order to respond to a small part of it -- they should delete the unwanted part of the orig post before replying and submitting

 

also on the left side of the topic you can click your mouse to get to the first post made after you read them all

[jhannah]

Amen, Lou! Quoting an entire page of a lengthy post is wasteful, IMO. Just quote the key words/phrases, and that's enough to make your response have a context.

 

As to using lengthy threads, I stop after a while. Once a topic goes to 3 or more pages there's really nothing left to be said that hasn't been said to answer the OP. More often than not, the OP's original inquiry is long gone; the thread has taken several tangents. I generally simply quit reading after a few pages. (Grumpy1's travelogue excepted.)

[RuthC]

Only Grumpy's, Jim? Harumph. :p

And I also agree with Lou, quoting is fine, but please delete the extraneous parts. If there's no specific part just mention the board name of the poster you are addressing.

As to the original question, I read all of a thread before I jump in. If the OP is asking for factual information, and the info has been given, then there is no need for me to repeat. If I can add something that may elaborate or clarify then I will jump in.

On the other hand, if the OP is asking for something that's an opinion then I have those! And I'm willing to share them! :D

But I have always read all of the thread (possibly over several days) first.

[jhannah]

Only Grumpy's, Jim?

But of course not! His was just the most recent multi-page thread. I've certainly enjoyed The Happy Wanderer travelogues, and I'll eagerly await the morphed version to come. ;) And then there's revneal's Noordam inaugural ... and ...

[RuthC]

Good answer, Jim. You may now come out of the doghouse.

[Sunshine91]

some posters copy the entire post (sometimes lengthy) in order to respond to a small part of it -- they should delete the unwanted part of the orig post before replying and submitting

 

I try really hard to do just that - keep only the part of the post I'm referencing. What I haven't learned how to do is "split" the post I'm quoting from or quote from multiple posters.

What I find annoying is when I get to the end of a thread & find that someone has been reading along & posts, with quotes, as they read, not waiting to finish the entire thread. Often the OP's question has been answered or the subject has been beaten to death & at the end along comes this nonsense post simply because someone didn't bother to read the whole thing before opening their mouth or letting their fingers do the talking as the case may be.

[cool change]

See, its getting tedious. I am enjoying WCB's posting of a journal. I just print that and read it like I would one of my novels. Its much easier to read that way and its been fantastic.