Why can't people read the THREADS first?

Why can't people read the THREADS first?

You all are familiar with the problem I'm sure:

You see an interesting thread that has tens of pages and oodles of stars and flags. It has made it to the "top four" and your thinking "Great another cool thread to read!" So you start to read it and suddenly you hit the 3rd or 4th post where the premise of the thread is completely debunked! You're thinking "this was just a red herring," and yet there are tons of posts following that fatal post, so you read on. Then you see that all the people from that point on just read the OP and they posted their response without reading a single response post!

Now, of course people are free to do as they please, but frankly, this is not only a huge waste of time, but I see it as a kind of inherent flaw in the entire forum model.

Imagine if you walked into a room where a guy was holding a discussion group, and he began the discussion with an initial question. The group has been discussing the topic for the last several hours and they have obviously moved on a fair amount from the original question posed by the moderator. But, because you spend so much time on ATS, you walk into the discussion group and you immediately stand up and deliver your response to the original question... to which the entire group shakes their head and asks you to sit down and LISTEN for a while before responding.

These threads are just that... THREADS... and like a real thread, they have LENGTH. They are not just personal conversations between the OP author and you. They are discussions in progress with a sometimes long history and context.

If the threads were structured more like YouTube comments, you could then provide a response to a particular post and your response would appear connected to the that post. Here at ATS however, there is a SINGLE thread of conversation, so every response you give falls into the main flow of the discussion.

Yes, you can quote the post you are replying to, but still, your response is in the sequence of posts that have to be looked at if a person wants to read the thread first, before posting. If your post is responding to something that has already been covered, or if you did not read the thread first, then it is highly likely that your post will NOT COUNT, thereby violating the ATS rules that require it to do so.

I really think it would benefit the forum tremendously if people read a thread first before adding to the conversation. If there was some way to make this easier or more convenient, that may go a long way. For example, on the page where you type your response, perhaps it could show the text of the most recent post. Even showing the words "Did you read the thread first?" may get people to comply with good discussion etiquette.

At any rate, I always try hard to read threads first, or at least to skim them, looking to see what direction the thread has taken. It would be really nice if others did the same... I know it requires discipline and respect for other ATS members, but hey... who knows what's possible if people really try!

reply to post by downisreallyup


And by the way... this was not meant as a criticism, but only as a constructive suggestion for improvement.

Sorry, didnt read the post, but will simply comment based on the topic presented

(kidding)

It would be nice to have sub-directories in threads..often people get derailed into their own topic that causes noise, detracting away from the main point. not sure how this would work mind you without having that crappy tree look to it, but I hear what your saying.

What your also asking is a massive overhaul of the format...as a web developer, I know what that entails and its not a pretty site...however, the overall effect would organize these threads alot more.

Well I agree some what,but you need to understand a fact of ATS life.

It is a GOBAL community.When you and those Aussies are up and on the forum reading and posting, others in other parts of the world are sleeping or working or a combination of both.

I have many times posted a response to a thread when there was only one reply.It takes sometimes a period to find the information to want to share and composed it.

Once I post it and look back there are numerous responses to mine.

Get use to it and remember this is a global forum we all don't live on your time.

[edit on 3-2-2010 by calcoastseeker]

[edit on 3-2-2010 by calcoastseeker]

reply to post by downisreallyup


People don't read the threads before responding because they might read something that would cause them to question their ideology, or preconceived notions about what ever the title of the thread says.

It's the old "my minds made up, don't confuse me with facts" syndrome.

this should be in the BB&Q section of ATS. A very valid question, I've asked many times.

flag



[edit on 3-2-2010 by whaaa]

Originally posted by whaaa
reply to post by downisreallyup

 

People don't read the threads before responding because they might read something that would cause them to question their ideology, or preconceived notions about what ever the title of the thread says.

It's the old "my minds made up, don't confuse me with facts" syndrome.
[edit on 3-2-2010 by whaaa]

So you calling them stupid? Ignorant?

What if they read the entire things are still find no merit in what they read? Then what?

Alot of people throw around the word truth and I gottabreak this down for some people

Personal truth does not always equal actual truth.

Let's say we are working on the Kennedy Assassination. Let's say you don't believe the official story. Then you come up with an idea that is sound to you. It wasn't Oswald, it was (totally made up name here) Johnson from the grassy knoll.

Now you research and present a vague idea why you think it was Johnson. You now accept it as truth and tell everyone else. It doesn't make it true just because you say it is but so many people here are just like you described...your mind is made up. So in fact alot of the truthers suffer from the same mentality that the non-readers do as you subscribe.

Guess what...each side has its extremists.

-Kyo

Originally posted by KyoZero

Originally posted by whaaa
reply to post by downisreallyup

 

People don't read the threads before responding because they might read something that would cause them to question their ideology, or preconceived notions about what ever the title of the thread says.

It's the old "my minds made up, don't confuse me with facts" syndrome.
[edit on 3-2-2010 by whaaa]

So you calling them stupid? Ignorant?

What if they read the entire things are still find no merit in what they read? Then what?

Well that's different and not what this thread is about. Right?

I'm contemplating starting a thread...."why can't people stay on topic"

[edit on 4-2-2010 by whaaa]

Originally posted by whaaa

Originally posted by KyoZero

Originally posted by whaaa
reply to post by downisreallyup

 

People don't read the threads before responding because they might read something that would cause them to question their ideology, or preconceived notions about what ever the title of the thread says.

It's the old "my minds made up, don't confuse me with facts" syndrome.
[edit on 3-2-2010 by whaaa]

So you calling them stupid? Ignorant?

What if they read the entire things are still find no merit in what they read? Then what?

Well that's different and not what this thread is about. Right?

I'm contemplating starting a thread...."why can't people stay on topic"

[edit on 4-2-2010 by whaaa]

Which you've taken out of context by the first couple lines only

I mentioned why some people skip and answered your assumption and your assumption was on topic

-Kyo

[edit on 4-2-2010 by KyoZero]

All I got to say is this is nothing new to ATS, there is no way you will solve this problem, so it is best to disregard it IMHO.

I think the funniest ones are the when the threads get put in the hoax forum, yet people still believe they are true

reply to post by OzWeatherman


Well we both know that there are some who believe (or disbelieve) no matter what....

Originally posted by jkrog08
reply to post by OzWeatherman

 

Well we both know that there are some who believe (or disbelieve) no matter what....

Yeah, thats true

Some people just want things to happen so badly that they wont listen to logic