Forum netiquette in a push-mode world?

[Filip Larsen]

I've recently started to notice that whenever I reply to some post (even if I'm the first one posting after the OP question), people will often make a later post to the thread seemingly without as much as a glance through mine or other peoples posts in the thread and often repeating what has already been said.

Being from a time where following Netiquette meant you had respect for your fellow poster, I find this behavior a bit offensive and came to wonder if this perhaps is driven by the new generation of "push mode" people that simply has grown up being accustomed to tweeting so much that they are veering into a "broadcast-only" kind of mode?

If this is so, how should I go about handle that behavior on this forum? Should I post differently? Wait longer before answering posts with no replies? Tell people in PM when they post what I just said 20 min earlier? I'm open to suggestions.


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netiquette

 

[xxChrisxx]

 

[ideasrule]

Being from a time where following Netiquette meant you had respect for your fellow poster, I find this behavior a bit offensive and came to wonder if this perhaps is driven by the new generation of "push mode" people that simply has grown up being accustomed to tweeting so much that they are veering into a "broadcast-only" kind of mode?

I wonder if the world is driven by the old generation of "complain mode" people who just can't accept the modern world, and try to impose their decades-old values on an evolving society. Anyways, there are a few explanations:

1. Not everybody wants to read every post before contributing, especially if the posts are long.
2. Edit conflicts: if you finish typing a response before someone else and both hit "Submit", both responses will appear.

3. You can't write concisely. Even in face-to-face meetings, if you bore the hell out of someone, they're going to zone out.

4. This...is...INTERNET

 

[MacLaddy]

I completely agree with the op, and I do so without bothering to read the other comments.

 

[Evo]

I wonder if the world is driven by the old generation of "complain mode" people who just can't accept the modern world, and try to impose their decades-old values on an evolving society. Anyways, there are a few explanations:

1. Not everybody wants to read every post before contributing, especially if the posts are long.
2. Edit conflicts: if you finish typing a response before someone else and both hit "Submit", both responses will appear.

3. You can't write concisely. Even in face-to-face meetings, if you bore the hell out of someone, they're going to zone out.

4. This...is...INTERNET

But on a forum, the point is if you wish to make a meaningful contribution, you must at least skim over all replies to make sure the OP has not already been sufficiently answered, or what you plan to say has not already been said.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

But on a forum, the point is if you wish to make a meaningful contribution, you must at least skim over all replies to make sure the OP has not already been sufficiently answered, or what you plan to say has not already been said.

When has that ever been the case? I agree that it is a failing of the internet, but it has been this way from day 1. I have spend a good part of my time here repeating the same facts over and over.

It also depends on the length of the thread and how much it diverges. Who wants to read pages and pages of arguments that don't apply to the point?

 

[drizzle]

It just gives you a clue on what the REAL job of a mentor is all about!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It just gives you a clue on what the REAL job of a mentor is all about!

Lisab said it best: It is like herding cats!

 

[drizzle]

:rofl:

 

[rootX]

Lisab said it best: It is like herding cats!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8

:rofl:

 

[drizzle]

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

 

[S_Happens]

I certainly understand what the OP is talking about. Only minutes ago while browsing here, there was such a blatent example of this that I really considered posting ONLY to address it. Including the offending post there were only 4-5 replies. The next to last post gave a wonderfully detailed answer, which was appropriately lengthy (not too long as to cause attention problems, but not as short and concise as it could have been). The last post was by someone who had nothing to contribute (which was obvious by their earlier reply). It was posted hours after the preceeding reply, with the poster completely oblivious.

I'm not from the older generation and it sometimes bothers me.

It doesn't bother me as much for someone to ignore a previous detailed response as it does when I give a detailed response to a thread, only to never hear from the person I'm answering again.

Edit- I'm with Ivan that it's been this way ever since there were public forums on the internet. Beyond the worthwhile reasons for poor posting, there will always be plain idiots.

 

[lisab]

One thing I really hate is when people don't read what is already posted before they post.

 

[epenguin]

It doesn't bother me as much for someone to ignore a previous detailed response as it does when I give a detailed response to a thread, only to never hear from the person I'm answering again.

Aah this disconcerting habit has been bugging me for a long time. Sometimes we do hear from the person again, not on that thread though but with another question in a new thread which also ends without echo. Recently I started to ask myself, haven't I answered a question in the same general area from the same guy before and there was no echo? So I'm not going to try and answer this one.

I think some nettiquette on this point should be in guidelines or stickies. It is just unsatisfactory IMO that so many themes are left in suspense. (It is not all that much better when a student says OK I solved it now, without telling us about the solution.) After all the solution does usually come out, either the student solves it (maybe not always as well as he thinks) or if it is an exercise the class gets the answer in the end. Maybe it should be laid down as normal the student round off a thread by coming back with answer/solution even if this is after a couple of weeks? - it wouldn't be much trouble. Or that the sticky advise that helpers will be noticing students who leave threads suspended in mid-air and be disinclined to help in future? No doubt we shall not be enforcing anything rigidly.

 

[Evo]

One thing I really hate is when people don't read what is already posted before they post.

:rofl: You kill me!

 

[Filip Larsen]

Thanks for the input so far, I appreciate it. It appears that I'm at least not the only one feeling a bit puzzle about how people choose to "participate" in threads and that the best advice seems to be to simply continue to do what I already do, namely let it slide, unless I want to further my frustration by trying to herd cats, which I don't.

And, just to make sure nobody gets it wrong: I was not complaining about "young people", I was more like puzzled and trying to understand what was going on and if I should be doing something differently. Guess being on this forum only a year or so meant I only recently started to catch on to this, although I must admit now that I think about it that the posting behavior described in this thread is something I've seen in various degrees on usenet many times over the years.

 

[HeLiXe]

Well...I did this yesterday lol I usually read all of the posts before I reply, but yesterday I was reading a thread and about one page in I had to leave. The topic was really emotional and I did not want to leave without giving my condolences. When I came back later with more time to read, I realized I gave condolences for the wrong pet -_- So I agree that it is best to read all the posts if you can before posting.

 

[ideasrule]

But on a forum, the point is if you wish to make a meaningful contribution, you must at least skim over all replies to make sure the OP has not already been sufficiently answered, or what you plan to say has not already been said.

Of course, I agree 100%. However, there's a limit to what you can realistically expect people to do on the Internet. I don't think the OP's description of forum posters as "push mode" people is accurate, or relevant--it's just the nature of the Internet that not many users feel like reading hundreds of words just to offer one short comment.

On a related topic, a lot of new instant messaging users get frustrated that the people they're talking to take seconds or minutes to respond, and sometimes don't respond at all. Internet IM culture says that ignoring an IM while busy playing a game, for example, is acceptable, even though ignoring someone trying to talk to you in real life is not.

 

[ideasrule]

And, just to make sure nobody gets it wrong: I was not complaining about "young people", I was more like puzzled and trying to understand what was going on and if I should be doing something differently. Guess being on this forum only a year or so meant I only recently started to catch on to this, although I must admit now that I think about it that the posting behavior described in this thread is something I've seen in various degrees on usenet many times over the years.

Yeah, this has been standard behavior for as long as I've been on forums. So has posting homework questions and not following up, which is obviously not ideal, but it's to be expected on the Internet.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

This is normal. It is actually not nearly as bad here as it is other places. Part of the problem I think is that certain anonymous forums are very quick to roll over and if you do not respond right away the topic you are responding to might not exist any more.

Here it is not so bad. On other forums populated mostly by youngins you will find very very many people responding to threads without taking any time to read other posts and you will see pretty much the same thing posted over and over again. The most humourous is when you see someone posting something that they obviously feel is quite clever without realizing that multiple people have already posted the same thing all thinking that they are quite clever.

 

[Pengwuino]

Well, to be honest, here's what you should realize.

1) This... is... Internet

2) What if you finish writing your response before someone else and you both hit submit at the same time? Both responses will appear

3) Not everyone wants to read every post, especially if they're long

4) You can't write concisely. You might bore someone and they might zone out.

I really hate when people don't read what is already posted before they post, anyone else agree?

 

[Evo]

i really hate when people don't read what is already posted before they post, anyone else agree?

lol.

 

[rootX]

Of course, I agree 100%. However, there's a limit to what you can realistically expect people to do on the Internet. I don't think the OP's description of forum posters as "push mode" people is accurate, or relevant--it's just the nature of the Internet that not many users feel like reading hundreds of words just to offer one short comment.

If someone wants to have an intelligent discussion either internet or in person, emotions and short useless comments are detrimental to such discussion.

Personally, I like to see outcomes and conclusions. I don't like running over hundred of pages until everyone is exhausted or taken it so far that it is nothing but insults.

 

[AtomicJoe]

Funny that because I have noticed a lot of people basically repeating what I have put in my post.
Any idea on how I should deal with it?

 

[AtomicJoe]

I mean nobody will read the whole thread before replying, especially if it is 200 pages long, because by the time you get to the end you will have forgotten what it was you wanted to say.

 

[AtomicJoe]

But on a forum, the point is if you wish to make a meaningful contribution, you must at least skim over all replies to make sure the OP has not already been sufficiently answered, or what you plan to say has not already been said.

But if you do that you won't make a contribution most of the time.

 

[JaredJames]

But if you do that you won't make a contribution most of the time.

I wonder how many threads are needlessly longer than required simply because someone has 'popped in' and dumped their immediate thoughts without reading the thread to see if it's covered and then having to spend another few pages discussing exactly the same thing over and over?

 

[AtomicJoe]

I wonder how many threads are needlessly longer than required simply because someone has 'popped in' and dumped their immediate thoughts without reading the thread to see if it's covered and then having to spend another few pages discussing exactly the same thing over and over?

I doubt most people care to be honest, not most of the people who use the forum anyway.

I mean a forum is a place for discussion, most people do not have the time or patience to read a long thread, for a start if it is several weeks old the person who started it may to all extents and purposes disappeared.
It is not like a newspaper, it is a place for interacting, and you can't interact with people who are not there.

 

[JaredJames]

I doubt most people care to be honest, not most of the people who use the forum anyway.

And you can speak for everyone?

Regardless, I think you'll find that after enough discussion, covering a point that someone has brought up again for the second, third, fourth, etc time just gets tedious.

I mean a forum is a place for discussion

Yes, but not continuously looping discussion of the same points down to peoples laziness.

 

[AtomicJoe]

And you can speak for everyone?

Regardless, I think you'll find that after enough discussion, covering a point that someone has brought up again for the second, third, fourth, etc time just gets tedious.Yes, but not continuously looping discussion of the same points down to peoples laziness.

You don't have to read everything, I don't know why they don't use the usenet format which had proper threads split into sub topics and you could easily see if 10 people had replied to the OP easily.
It is often quicker to reply than to read the thread.

I may not speak for everyone, but probably all those people who do what the OP complains about.

 

[jtbell]

But if you do that you won't make a contribution most of the time.

You just have to get in on a thread early, while it's still developing and manageable.

 

[AtomicJoe]

You just have to get in on a thread early, while it's still developing and manageable.

That is pretty unlikely for most people.
The 'manageability' of the thread is of little concern to most people, certainly not the people who made the software for these forums (jelsoft/vbulletin or whatever) because it seem a poor method to use for manageability.

 

[JaredJames]

You don't have to read everything

So how do you make a valuable contribution if you don't know what has / hasn't been brought up? It's no different to the people who come here and say "I've come up with something which goes against relativity, but I've never studied current theories".

It is often quicker to reply than to read the thread.

Yes, but then you're just blindly spooling into it and you could spend time typing up a post only for it to be irrelevant / redundant as it's already been mentioned.

It just serves to perpetuate the thread.

 

[AtomicJoe]

So how do you make a valuable contribution if you don't know what has / hasn't been brought up? It's no different to the people who come here and say "I've come up with something which goes against relativity, but I've never studied current theories".


Yes, but then you're just blindly spooling into it and you could spend time typing up a post only for it to be irrelevant / redundant as it's already been mentioned.

It just serves to perpetuate the thread.

How do you make a valuable contribution if you never contribute anything?

You don't have to have studied current theories to come up with something, more likely you will get sidelined into thing in the orthodox fashion if you study other peoples ideas.
Fresh thinking is often required.

If a post is redundant no harm is done, at least the answer is at the end of the thread, which is where most people start in long threads.
If nobody replies the the thread it dies, hardly a great outcome.

 

[Filip Larsen]

For what it is worth, my original puzzlement was not about long threads, but regarding very short threads where apart from the original question there is only one or two answers, after which someone comes along a few hours later and post more or less the same in a way that makes it seem like they aren't even aware that the question has already been answered.