NationStates Jolt Archive

When confronted with a loooooooong post in an otherwise interesting thread -something in the neighborhood of 7-10 wordy paragraphs of convoluted reasoning, do you actually read it? Or do you just skip blithely past what could have been a cogent and compelling (or a tedious and idiotic) discussion of the topic?

I opt for skipping blithely.

Skim until I get the jist and then reply quoting a very small portion of it

if the first paragraph makes no sense, i skip it.

now and then someone posts something very interesting that is worth slogging through

the ones i hate are the line-by-line post responses and re-responses that have to be scrolled past to get to a more reasonably sized post. they are so tedious.

A needle pulling thread . . .

I'll read it until it either becomes:

A) boring and infantile

or

B) it becomes so idiotic it is no longer worthy of my time.

Some people actually post very factual stuff on here, or they have very well thought out arguments. Others are just a bit silly. Personally, I avoid the whole debate thing as, I believe what I believe, so why argue over it? I'm not going to change my mind, and I seriously doubt others on here would be compelled to do the same through some words posted on a thread on the internet.
Serious debate is best carried out in person, that way it's far easier to gauge your opponents reaction.

I'll read it if I find it interesting, and if I want to make a further point in the argument I will read it, or at least skim it so that I don't posit an argument either already covered or countered and look like a damn fool!

It depends on how much I still have to read to be current on the thread, or whether I'm more interested in the verbal sparring/one-way ass-kicking between a couple of posters.

I try to read them. If they are coherent then it doesn't take long at all compared to some of the technical documentation I read. If I get lost along the way then I give up and move on to the next post. Reasons to give up on a post could be that it's written in badly mangled language, that the logic is so far fetched it goes off topic or that it's only the same old tedious drivel.

The worst posts are IMO the ones that declare an opinion out of the blue without providing any detail. What do you say to "This is how it is." when you have no idea why they think so or what they wanted to accomplish by bringing it up?

When confronted with a loooooooong post in an otherwise interesting thread -something in the neighborhood of 7-10 wordy paragraphs of convoluted reasoning, do you actually read it? Or do you just skip blithely past what could have been a cogent and compelling (or a tedious and idiotic) discussion of the topic?

I opt for skipping blithely.

Sometimes I read them, usually I don't.

When confronted with a loooooooong post in an otherwise interesting thread -something in the neighborhood of 7-10 wordy paragraphs of convoluted reasoning, do you actually read it? Or do you just skip blithely past what could have been a cogent and compelling (or a tedious and idiotic) discussion of the topic?

I opt for skipping blithely.

If I'm involved in the thread, I probably read everything, no matter how long. I might not reply, unless there was something worth my specific attention, or that cries out to me.

If the post is addressed to me, I consider it the height of bad manners not to read the whole post - even if I end up just choosing to not reply, or opt out of continuing the debate.

It's a very complicated issue and I think there are many important points to make on this matter.....

*posts long and ramlbing mad despot style monologue*

if the first paragraph makes no sense, i skip it.

now and then someone posts something very interesting that is worth slogging through

the ones i hate are the line-by-line post responses and re-responses that have to be scrolled past to get to a more reasonably sized post. they are so tedious. bleh I hate that too there should be a law.

OR Rather
if the first paragraph makes no sense, i skip it.
Ya me too



now and then someone posts something very interesting that is worth slogging through thats why i read the first paragraph to see if it's boring before I continue


the ones i hate are the line-by-line post responses and re-responses that have to be scrolled past to get to a more reasonably sized post. yeah but some times reasonabley sized ones aren't that good either
they are so tedious. Oh you call that tedious :rolleyes:

bleh I hate that too there should be a law.

OR Rather
Ya me too


thats why i read the first paragraph to see if it's boring before I continue

yeah but some times reasonabley sized ones aren't that good either
Oh you call that tedious :rolleyes:

lol

only when it gets so long that i have to scroll 2 or 3 screens worth of scrolling. especially when they arent really making new points at all.

Personally, I avoid the whole debate thing as, I believe what I believe, so why argue over it? I'm not going to change my mind, and I seriously doubt others on here would be compelled to do the same through some words posted on a thread on the internet.
I really don't get this. Don't you ever want to be in a position where you do change your mind? I love realising I'm wrong, because it means that I can improve my world view to factor in a response to this incorrectness.

I read it until I become bored with it.

When confronted with a loooooooong post in an otherwise interesting thread -something in the neighborhood of 7-10 wordy paragraphs of convoluted reasoning, do you actually read it? Or do you just skip blithely past what could have been a cogent and compelling (or a tedious and idiotic) discussion of the topic?

Depends entirely on whether it's cogent or tedious.

Only one rule: if it's a reply to me, I read every word.

I opt for skipping blithely.

There is another option: skimming it. If the point is obvious and the poster is just blovinating, one word in five is probably sufficient to check there's nothing interesting there.

I just let everyone do the work for me, then read their condensed understanding.

You all work for me!

if the first paragraph makes no sense, i skip it.

I guess I do that too. If there's a huge blunder at the start, I read the last line and move on.

Sometimes, though, a poster can have a very good point but it comes at the end. It's like "I have this great idea. Now, how do we get there from what I'm replying to?" and they build this ridiculous structure to try to get to what is actually a worthy idea.

I just let everyone do the work for me, then read their condensed understanding.

You all work for me!

Or not.

*malfunctions*

Or not.

*malfunctions*

You're expendable, too. :)

I really don't get this. Don't you ever want to be in a position where you do change your mind? I love realising I'm wrong, because it means that I can improve my world view to factor in a response to this incorrectness.

I do change my mind, quite frequently actually. However, it's never happened on some debate on the internet. It has always been done in face to face debate. It's so much easier to see the sincerity of a persons argument. I've found on here a lot of people like to play devils advocate. I'm not changing my mind on a stance when I'm not sure that the person spouting it even believes it.

I guess I do that too. If there's a huge blunder at the start, I read the last line and move on.

Sometimes, though, a poster can have a very good point but it comes at the end. It's like "I have this great idea. Now, how do we get there from what I'm replying to?" and they build this ridiculous structure to try to get to what is actually a worthy idea.

and, like you, i do read every word that is addressed to me. (except when i dont notice). it doesnt happen that often so its an ego boost for me.

i hate it when a poster has made a bad start and i ignore or misinterpret the rest of the post only to find out from other people's reaction that he wasnt an idiot after all.

Ashmoria*,
It depends on the thread and the poster. If it is Vetalia or Andaras posting about economic theory, I generally enjoy reading what they have to say. If it is a thread about a law and The Cat-Tribes posts something, I read until I hit the first Supreme Court case. But if the thread is about the greatest heavy metal band of all time and The Cat-Tribes posts something very long, I skip it. There's just less need for a long post in that kind of thread.

I do generally make an effort to read long posts though, mostly because my own are so long-winded.

*At least one person will read this now.

Ashmoria*,
It depends on the thread and the poster. If it is Vetalia or Andaras posting about economic theory, I generally enjoy reading what they have to say. If it is a thread about a law and The Cat-Tribes posts something, I read until I hit the first Supreme Court case. But if the thread is about the greatest heavy metal band of all time and The Cat-Tribes posts something very long, I skip it. There's just less need for a long post in that kind of thread.

I do generally make an effort to read long posts though, mostly because my own are so long-winded.

*At least one person will read this now.

lol

if only there were a way to pretend to have you on ignore and still respond to this post.

lol

if only there were a way to pretend to have you on ignore and still respond to this post.

You could have read it with a puppet . . .

You could have read it with a puppet . . .

oooooo you mean i could have quoted his post with my puppet response then i would have had a reason to see his post....

Maybe you could say, "Hmm, I wonder what New Limacon posted. Too bad I have him on ignore."

I'm not sure why I said that. I have no idea what Ashmoria was talking about, as I can't see any of her posts.

Maybe you could say, "Hmm, I wonder what New Limacon posted. Too bad I have him on ignore."

I'm not sure why I said that. I have no idea what Ashmoria was talking about, as I can't see any of her posts.

lolol

ya know... that would be really mean of you since you used my name in the post.

I do change my mind, quite frequently actually. However, it's never happened on some debate on the internet. It has always been done in face to face debate. It's so much easier to see the sincerity of a persons argument. I've found on here a lot of people like to play devils advocate. I'm not changing my mind on a stance when I'm not sure that the person spouting it even believes it.

Should the merit of an argument be ignored because of it's presenter? Should it really matter how sincere a person is if they make a good point, intended or not?

A more reasonable point would be that one can't clearly see context with just text, so a face to face debate would be necessary to present a convincing argument. That I could understand, but just denying the merit of an argument based only on the nature of that argument's presenter seems too dismissive.

Furthermore, what is the point of even being here and posting if you don't intend to contribute any more than your current opinion without truly considering the feedback?

By the way, I totally agree with your point of view and didn't mean a word of that. I was just playing the devils advocate.

Depends on if its cohesive, and if theyre Arguing with me...

I generally dont bother reading people's posts past the first or second line that agree with me...I have a tendency to "Lock On" to threats, lol..

Should the merit of an argument be ignored because of it's presenter? Should it really matter how sincere a person is if they make a good point, intended or not?

A more reasonable point would be that one can't clearly see context with just text, so a face to face debate would be necessary to present a convincing argument. That I could understand, but just denying the merit of an argument based only on the nature of that argument's presenter seems too dismissive.

Furthermore, what is the point of even being here and posting if you don't intend to contribute any more than your current opinion without truly considering the feedback?

By the way, I totally agree with your point of view and didn't mean a word of that. I was just playing the devils advocate.

Does reading all this count? lol

Does reading all this count? lol

Hey, I have seen entire essays and pages upon pages of dialog, compared to that my post is a speck on a piece of dust. Plus, it wasn't that long...

Hey, I have seen entire essays and pages upon pages of dialog, compared to that my post is a speck on a piece of dust. Plus, it wasn't that long...

Pff, it was THE longest thing i have ever read in my ENTIRE Lifetime!!!!

it was a joke friend, lol...

Does reading all this count? lol

Pff, it was THE longest thing i have ever read in my ENTIRE Lifetime!!!!

it was a joke friend, lol...

Oh, that little end bit must be some secret symbol of jokingness then. :p <-Context Enhancer TM

I had a feeling you weren't being serious, I felt I had to respond "just in case" though. Like I mentioned in my previous statement, it's hard to see context in just text.

It's usually easy to tell whether a screed will be worth the effort to read. If I feel it'll bring me understanding, I read it. If it'll help me figure out where the thread is going/has gone, I'll read it. If it's so much typing-as-masturbation, I won't.