Poll: "Haven't read any of the other replies, but..."

[Ginevra]

I have to laugh at the number of people throwing in the obvious irony about not reading all the replies in this thread.:lol:

[Ellesmere]

I was wondering about this, being relatively new. After reading the other responses above mine (ha! Ok, I only skimmed through!), I can see why even in conversations with a lot of back-and-forth, it is a just a signal that the poster is saying, "hey, haven't had time yet, so forgive me if I'm just duplicating" or "haven't read, too busy, just wanted to say ..."

 

I think the only time it would get to me would be in a long, heated thread where about a zillion pages in, someone comes in and is in effect saying they don't care about anyone else's opinion, states something to stir the pot and never comes back.

 

If it's a thread where the general point is to just give your two cents to answer something and there isn't much discussion going on, I would definitely not be reading the whole thing either.

 

And I just typed all that knowing no one but possibly the OP is going to read this! :lol:

[stripe]

I also hate people who call into radio shows, make some statement and then vow to take their answer off the air. Hello, the people at the radio station have some say in how much you get to talk, but I consider it offputting. Where's the discussion? It reminds me of a shouting match.

[joannqn]

I don't see why someone has to read what everyone else thought before answering the original question.

 

BTW, I didn't read the previous posts, just the original post. :D

[Spy Car]

I have not read any of the other replies, but I think it is bloody rude to just jump in at the end of a thread and spout-off without reading what other the posters have had to say. And I'm sure you all agree :D

 

Bill

[BatmansWife]

I'm guilty of it. This is the reason:

 

I have done it, but when there are several pages it tends to get tedious so I say I haven't read them. Not because the opinions don't count but I say that just in case I have repeated something someone else says.

 

Which is why it does bug me just a tad when someone quotes you (when you said you didn't read the other replies) and tell you that someone else said that. :glare::D

 

Rivka, I voted when: more than 20 pages long AND other.

This is a very interesting question.

Oftentimes, when I do this, I have intent to later read every post and I usually end up doing so. Usually :tongue_smilie:. I may be eager to post and might be in a hurry or whatever. But I try to read all or most of the replies later.

Other times, I realize that many of the posts might be repeats and I really might not have time to read all of them. Or, of course, if more than 20 pages long, I might not be able to get through all that.

I don't see it as necessarily rude.

I do, however, think that the OP should take the time to read all the replies, since she's the one who asked the question to begin with.

If I've offended here since I have been guilty of this, I do apologize.

 

So....you'd read everything if it were 19 pages? :lol: I'm just wondering why 20 is the magic cut-off number in the poll. :D

FYI: I DID read all the replies to this thread. But....I didn't really gain anything from it....if anything it just took my time. It didn't change what I intended, and did, say (other than the fact that if I hadn't read them all I wouldn't have quoted HSLover and Negin in Grenada).

[Abigail4476]

How do you feel when somebody jumps into a thread declaring that they haven't read the other responses and don't intend to?

 

I've been on other forums where, whether or not people actually do read the thread before posting, it's considered bad form to say you didn't read it. On the Hive, it seems like people say it all the time and I haven't seen anyone complain about it.

 

To me, it's fine on a thread that doesn't have a lot of back-and-forth ("which do you like better, Jane Austen or Georgette Heyer?"). But in a serious or contentious discussion, it seems rude to me. When someone says, "I haven't read any of the other responses, but I think..." I tend to read it as, "I can't be bothered to read to your opinion, but here, pay attention to mine!"

 

I do this all the time. :D Sometimes because I'm in a hurry--and sometimes because I want to give my fresh opinion without having it swayed by other people's posts. Sometimes I'll scan a really long thread and only read diligently through those that catch my eye; sometimes on a very serious thread, I'll take the time to read through every post, every link, and do research of my own. It really depends on my schedule and my mood.

 

Since my initial response is often in response to the OP, I don't consider it rude to respond to that post before I read and respond to others. If I'm responding mid-thread, I'm more likely to read back a bit before I post.

[texasmama]

My online time is limited so I may not have 15 minutes to read an entire thread. If I think I have something to offer, I usually state "Haven't read the other replies..." since I may very well be repeating what 25 other folks have already said...or giving advice on an issue which was resolved last week on page 12 of the thread.:tongue_smilie: It's the risk one takes for being willing to get only a little bit involved.;)

 

BTW, I didn't read any of the replies to this thread.:D No, seriously. I didn't.

 

Oh...forgot the other reason...sometimes I reply without reading because I don't want the replies of others to color my own reply. I don't like to pretend that I have read the entire thread when I haven't so you will see that little phrase exit my "mouth" a lot on the board. I never mean it rudely.

[Abigail4476]

BTW, I didn't read any of the replies to this thread.:D No, seriously. I didn't.

 

:lol::lol: Me, either. (Not until after I'd posted, anyway.) :lol:

[gardenmom5]

I take it as they are saying, "Please forgive me if this has been stated before, if the conversation has veered, if this is an unpopular viewpoint that's been debated; but I didn't get a chance to read it yet and didn't want to ignore you by NOT answering."

:iagree:

[Aubrey]

In general, I think it's rude, but there are exceptions. Threads like this one, for ex. ;) Still, I try to read at least 2-3pp of replies. It's like politely listening to a conversation (imo) before butting in.

 

Dh says I tend to be too abrupt in my communication, but to ME, an apology before the fact just puts off the thesis statement, & if you ARE repeating what someone else has said, then you're *doubly* wasting someone's time. I also skip niceties like, "Good afternoon" in my emails. :001_huh: :blushing:

 

I don't understand why the OP is obligated to put up w/ time-wasting responses (& potentially feeling obligated to reply. Again.) but none of the pp's are.

 

I do sometimes post a response w/out reading everything, but if it's a thread that warrants reading it all, this exception would be when I don't want to forget my thoughts in reading others'...then, if I go back & read the same thing or something that changes my mind, I edit. Saves readers time. Although...sometimes my posts seem to disappear in hot threads, so maybe that approach isn't really the best. :confused: :lol:

[texasmama]

:lol::lol: Me, either. (Not until after I'd posted, anyway.) :lol:

 

:lol:I am a classic "post without reading other replies and then quickly read as many other replies as I can and then edit just as quickly if I have grossly missed the mark". :tongue_smilie: I am bit impulsive like that. Please pardon...I have so little opportunity for impulsivity in my life.:tongue_smilie:

[Pink Fairy]

It seems like 99% of the time, the people who post without reading aren't adding anything new to the conversation.

 

ETA: But it doesn't bother me.

Edited August 21, 2011 by Mamabegood

[Negin]

So....you'd read everything if it were 19 pages?

I'm just wondering why 20 is the magic cut-off number in the poll.

Oh no, 20 is not some magic number, it's just an example. Also, it was one of the options on Rivka's poll. That's my reason. I don't have any attachment to that number :lol:.

[Laura Corin]

I read the OP and respond to that. I assume that the OP is hoping for a wide range of responses, and mine is likely to be more individual if I haven't read all the others. I then sometimes go back and read the other responses.

 

ETA: There's also the time zone problem - I often don't come to a thread until eight hours or more after it's exploded.

 

Laura

Edited August 21, 2011 by Laura Corin

[Negin]

I read the OP and respond to that. I assume that the OP is hoping for a wide range of responses, and mine is likely to be more individual if I haven't read all the others. I then sometimes go back and read the other responses.

:iagree:

[Mom in High Heels]

well, i haven't read all the replies, so here's my two cents.

 

You are clearly awesome. I don't think it's a big deal if someone hasn't read all the replies. Have you SEEN how long some of these threads are? Good grief, who has time for that?? Besides, unless the OP updates (which IMO should be done IN the first post so readers don't have to hunt for it), what anyone else has to say is not likely going to change what I think. Wait, has anyone said this already? 'Cause I haven't read all the replies. :D

 

ETA: There's also the time zone problem - I often don't come to a thread until eight hours or more after it's exploded.

 

This! I'm 6 hours ahead of EST/EDT and since most posters seem to be on US time (I know not ALL, but most), things have already gone crazy by the time I get to the thread. Since I'm supposed to be schooling my child (that's what I tell James Bond so I don't have to work, you know <--it's a joke), I don't have time read through 30+ pages.

Edited August 21, 2011 by Mom in High Heels

[momofkhm]

I take it as they are saying, "Please forgive me if this has been stated before, if the conversation has veered, if this is an unpopular viewpoint that's been debated; but I didn't get a chance to read it yet and didn't want to ignore you by NOT answering."

 

This!

[LaxMom]

I take it as they are saying, "Please forgive me if this has been stated before, if the conversation has veered, if this is an unpopular viewpoint that's been debated; but I didn't get a chance to read it yet and didn't want to ignore you by NOT answering."

 

:iagree: I don't think it's "rude". I don't think it implies that one doesn't care what others have opined. Sometimes people even state that they want to give their untainted opinion, and they are now going back to read the thread.

 

I do think it can be humorous, though, when we've veered off into kilts/kitties/shopping carts/crock pots/recipes and someone wanders in with a sincere reply. Or when someone starts with the "I haven't read all the posts..." and it's post #3 on the thread. :lol:

[Lady Florida.]

I take it as they are saying, "Please forgive me if this has been stated before, if the conversation has veered, if this is an unpopular viewpoint that's been debated; but I didn't get a chance to read it yet and didn't want to ignore you by NOT answering."

 

This is kind of how I see it. Or, sometimes reading the replies muddles your thoughts and you want to state your opinion before doing that. What about the first person to reply? There were no other replies to read, and that poster is replying to the OP. Others should have the option of simply replying to the OP. When I reply before reading the other replies, I usually go back and read them afterward. I know not everyone does that, but it doesn't bother me if they don't.

 

Still, I try to read at least 2-3pp of replies. It's like politely listening to a conversation (imo) before butting in.

 

I do this.

 

 

BTW, I only read some of the replies and will read the rest after I hit submit. :001_smile:

[Nestof3]

I admit I just don't understand why people think it's required to read other replies before answering.

 

If someone asks for a microscope rec., why see what others say first?

 

When someone posts that they've had a bad day, why read what someone else says before giving the OP a little boost?

 

If a person asks for other's interpretation on a matter, why would I need to read others' replies before giving mine?

 

In every case, my answer should be my own response to the OP.

 

Now, if I proceed to read, I may find additional info from OP to respond to, or I may want to respond to something someone else says.

[Paige]

I don't understand why the OP is obligated to put up w/ time-wasting responses (& potentially feeling obligated to reply. Again.) but none of the pp's are.

 

I don't think the OP has any obligation to keep reading or responding to many duplicate posts. Many times, I see someone thank the group and say she has now received the answer she wants. I assume that many of those people do not come back to see what else is posted. If you want to post after that point, there's no harm in it and sometimes threads turn and people take things off topic, but the OP is no longer expected to participate. On the other hand, if you do think the OP is obligated to read every post, then I think the burden is on her because she started it!

 

In very long threads, I will read the first and last 2 pages before posting so I can get a feel for how the thread is going.

[Firefly]

I do find it annoying. If I want to participate in a thread I take the time to read what has been said-- which often means breaking it up into small chunks when I can find time to sit and read for a bit.

 

Now, I can see it in some cases, like "What do you like on your burger?" :D Doesn't really matter in threads like those. But when there are 20+ pages of a controversial topic, and someone pops in to make a point that's already been brought up and debated 10 pages back, you have to recapitulate everything that's already been said. Annoying.

[mamajudy]

I usually try to read the whole thread befor posting, but sometimes I just don't have time at the moment to read all the posts, and if I wait another day or two, the thread will be too old. We're homeschoolers... we should all understand BUSY. It can be annoying, as Kelli said. I'll try to do better

Edited August 21, 2011 by mamajudy

[Hannah C.]

Some threads are super, crazy long, and while the person replying may want to respond to the OP, they don't necessarily want to read the 10 or 25 pages' worth of other people's replies. I appreciate the disclaimer - it means that if I'm the OP, I know that they haven't seen any updates I may or may not have posted. Or, if it's a big discussion, I know that they don't *know* that that person on page 15 talked about this same part of it already. In both cases, I know not to take offense.

 

That being said, I would only use that if it was a long thread about a person's situation, or a long thread on a controversial issue (and usually I try and read all of those before I comment anyway). I wouldn't say I hadn't read the other replies if I was telling someone what I liked on my burger. ;)

[Amy1k]

I didn't read all of this thread, because 8 pages??? Anyway, it does make me feel self-conscious because I've just posted something similar. Frankly, I just don't have time sometimes to read giant threads. I'm part of another board where there are fewer members and it's less time-consuming to read all of the responses and I do.

[KidsHappen]

I answered other. I have not read any of the other replies in this thread yet. The reason I do this is because I sometimes want to give my honest unbiased opinion without influence of other people's opinions. Sometimes it is because I am afraid I will forget what it was I wanted to say if I read the entire thread first. Old age will do that to you. :blush:

[Scarlett]

I take it as they are saying, "Please forgive me if this has been stated before, if the conversation has veered, if this is an unpopular viewpoint that's been debated; but I didn't get a chance to read it yet and didn't want to ignore you by NOT answering."

 

:iagree: Whenever I say "I haven't read the other replies yet" the above is exactly what I mean.

[Scarlett]

I answered other. I have not read any of the other replies in this thread yet. The reason I do this is because I sometimes want to give my honest unbiased opinion without influence of other people's opinions. Sometimes it is because I am afraid I will forget what it was I wanted to say if I read the entire thread first. Old age will do that to you. :blush:

 

Oh and these reasons too. :tongue_smilie:

[MamaJo]

I often post without reading on an opinion type thread so I can give my unvarnished opinion before I am swayed by others thinking. Then I will go back and read the thread and amend if I need to do so.

[Crimson Wife]

This post already has 9 pages, and I only read the first one :D

[Spy Car]

I'm not sure that I'm even going to read my own post :D

 

Bill

[SKL]

Does not bother me. I assume the original poster wants feedback, so my response is invited regardless of whether I've heard everyone else's. Saying "I haven't read others' replies" explains that I'm just giving my original reaction without taking into account what has been previously written, e.g., the direction the thread has taken and whether my comment is repetitive of someone else's.

 

PS, I have not read all the other responses to this thread . . . .

[catz]

I didn't read the other replies ;), but it doesn't bother me a bit. If a thread gets to like 20+ pages before I can get to it, I often don't bother unless it's a poll or a particular area of interest.

[MariannNOVA]

Sometimes there is no time -- but I always try to read at least the first 3 or 4 pages if I am going to reply.

[mommyagain]

Apparently "I have already voted in this poll". Does the fact that I don't remember how I voted mean I have a poll problem?;)

[Farrar]

I can only assume (not having read most of this) that someone has made the joke that they haven't read the other replies.

 

I think it's okay if you have a unique experience you want to share.

 

Oy, why am I giving a serious response?

[scrapbookbuzz]

I think that courteousy deems reading at least two replies before jumping in.

[UmMusa]

It doesn't bother me at all b/c I assume the OP wants to read other people's replies while I, on the other hand, might not feel like getting involved in the debate or tangent going on in the thread.