SA Footy

Just wondering what others do.

Personally I tend to quote a post that I want to answer as I come to it as opposed to reading the whole thread 1st before going back and quoting.

Must admit it has caught me out a few times though.

this one, I read the first post (shock!)

Normally I read the first post, then reply - I don't tend to read all the posts - which as you've eluded to, has caught up with me before.

However, most of the posts on threads more recently have tended to move away from the original thread title - so I don't think I'm missing much.

99.9% of the time I only post after reading every post on that thread, I don't want to cover ground that's already been covered.
In the 0.1% of times I do post without reading every post I'll usually start off by saying "Apologies if this has been covered already but..."

90% of the time read only 1st post especially if post has many pages and I am just too lazy to read every page. Sometimes read only 1st and then last pages.

I tend to barge into posting before I have read through the topic, so I have been caught out like you have JtC.

Most of the time, if I see something I want to reply to I'll skim through the rest of the thread to see if it's already had a reply. Doesn't always work ...senior moments starting to take effect these days.

Regards
JAS

JAS wrote:Most of the time, if I see something I want to reply to I'll skim through the rest of the thread to see if it's already had a reply. Doesn't always work ...senior moments starting to take effect these days.

Regards
JAS

Me too JAS.

I will usually check the whole thread 99% of the time, or will opt for the "Sorry if this has already been mentioned.." clause.

JAS wrote:Most of the time, if I see something I want to reply to I'll skim through the rest of the thread to see if it's already had a reply. Doesn't always work ...senior moments starting to take effect these days.

Regards
JAS

I have a slightly different approach for long winded posts. I use other people's quotes from the long winded piece as a synopsis of any interesting comments that may have been made.
I think we should make a practice of highlighting comments within our posts that others may find interesting. That way others can zone in on a piece if the highlights interest them.

therisingblues wrote:

JAS wrote:Most of the time, if I see something I want to reply to I'll skim through the rest of the thread to see if it's already had a reply. Doesn't always work ...senior moments starting to take effect these days.

Regards
JAS

I have a slightly different approach for long winded posts. I use other people's quotes from the long winded piece as a synopsis of any interesting comments that may have been made.
I think we should make a practice of highlighting comments within our posts that others may find interesting. That way others can zone in on a piece if the highlights interest them.

Similarly I'll quite often just quote the part of the post Ive read (like anyone can), mind you that doesn't always work as tonight I got accused of unethically tampering with someone's quote.

Wedgie wrote:...Similarly I'll quite often just quote the part of the post Ive read (like anyone can), mind you that doesn't always work as tonight I got accused of unethically tampering with someone's quote.

It seems reasonable to just quote the section of someone's post that you are responding to, rather than the whole thing, so long as you don't actually change what they said.
[I just have to keep fighting the impulse to correct the spelling and grammar. ]

Psyber wrote:

Wedgie wrote:...Similarly I'll quite often just quote the part of the post Ive read (like anyone can), mind you that doesn't always work as tonight I got accused of unethically tampering with someone's quote.

It seems reasonable to just quote the section of someone's post that you are responding to, rather than the whole thing, so long as you don't actually change what they said.
[I just have to keep fighting the impulse to correct the spelling and grammar. ]

Agreed fully mate, unless having some fun with a mate, I haven't done that on purpose.

Read the last post generally, then post.

Sometimes I read the entire thread.

I miss anything that is longer than say 20 words.

Some like to play journalist.... Too F'n Booring....

I have better things to do.... Cant you post a video..?

Dog_ger wrote:Read the last post generally, then post.
Sometimes I read the entire thread.
I miss anything that is longer than say 20 words.
Some like to play journalist.... Too F'n Booring....
I have better things to do.... Cant you post a video..?

By contrast I can read a full page of text much faster than I can watch a video so I skip most videos!
I can also read a page on paper a lot faster than I can read a display on a monitor, and because of my speed-reading training "full justification" of text is a pet hate because the abnormal spacing slows me down.

I usually just glance through the posts and only read the short posts.

I can't be bothered reading an essay.

Read first for mine.

I dont read posts longer than 4 lines.

hearts on fire wrote:I usually just glance through the posts and only read the short posts.
I can't be bothered reading an essay.
Read first for mine.

Tut tut.. When I was your age I read the complete works of George Bernard Shaw, though I admit skimming a bit in some of his more boring plays like "Man and Superman".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Bernard_Shaw

TroyGFC wrote:I dont read posts longer than 4 lines.

Does it make your brain hurt?

TroyGFC wrote:I dont read posts longer than 4 lines.

The quick brown fox chases the lazy dog.

Was it a car or a cat I saw?

Lean beef has less fat than roast chicken.

Friends, romans, countrymen, lend me your ears!

You're a liar and a d!ckhead Troy