to think that you have no right to an opinion if you don't read the whole thread?

[AbbyAbsinthe]

This is something that REALLY annoys me. A thread can change direction within a couple of posts - the OP gives more information, changes their opinion etc - yet still, posters give their opinion based solely on the OP, taking no notice whatsoever of the rest of the thread.

It comes across as horribly crass sometimes too.

I do appreciate that you don't always have time to read the whole thing, especially if it's pages long - but then, save your opinion until you DO have time, yes? Please?

Grrrr.

No, I don't agree

YABU. I don't want to excluded from having an opinion just because I can't read 12 pages. Bossy thread police (tut).

Yes, I do agree.

I think posters should read the OP and their subsequent posts. Other than that they can do what they like.

Agree - it is totally rude and makes the new poster look a bit of an idiot especially where there is a complete change of direction yet the new poster is just commenting on the title and opening post.

i cba reading 100 posts saying aww you poor thing, when your opinion is get a grip and do something constructive. I prefer just to skip to the end and say get a grip

I generally skim read just in case the OP has found a solution or agreed with everyone, but really don't have time to read all of it. I particularly hate it when one poster has a row with another poster which takes up about 8 pages of it. But they are entitled to scrap, as I am entitled to skim read.

YABU

If its more than about 7 pages I often can't be arsed and I'll opine on the original question. If the OP wants to drip feed info, its not my problem.

It's not always a case of 100 posts saying get a grip though, is it?

The recent thread (that's now deleted) about the Sky geezer and his shoe, is a prime example - it really wasn't about that. But posters were still commenting on the shoe scenario rather than the heartfelt further posts by the OP on the state of her relationship. Know what I mean?

Abby....... 'no right to an opinion'??!!?!

Says who?

Hmmm... No I think it's one of those sitautions where you should realise your opinion doesn't consitute a "right" or lack of.

In fact you sound like abit of a control freak

YABU
If its long (but interesting) I read the first couple of pages, then skim it to check the OP hasn't been back with more info/a total change of heart, then if I have words of wisdom I post.

But I do agree its a shame when the OP has already agreed she IBU and get flamed for pages and pages by posters who have missed that vital piece of info...

Add to that the numerous posts from other posters pointing out that OP has changed her mind....but at that point I switch off because the thread is no longer interesting.

You are being totally unreasonable.
I'll go and read the thread now...

You have an opinion whevever you wish

Possibly you do not have a right to call an OP very harshly without checking for a withdrawal or apology. Quite often that happens and poor OP is still being alled on something tehy apologised for 658 posts later.

No, I agree with you now.
Actually tbh I don't usually bother with threads over about 100 posts as I don't have time/patience to read them and won't post without at least trying to read them all for the reasons you have said.

AbbyAbsinthe if the OP wantsto talk about something else then she/he should open a new thread.

YABU

I think posters should at least squizz down the thread and read a few more of the OP's comments further along before commenting.

The trouble is, there are too many drip feeders so if people base their comments on the OP only, the OPs only have themselves to blame if the comments are way off the mark.

Opening posts can be difficult to type because you're stuck between not wanting to give too much waffling information and not wanting to give to little.

But some people put no thought whatsoever into their OP in terms of not bothering to mention the child's age (always important) or assuming everyone here knows that poster's history...which imo is a bit big headed to assume people will remember things about them and their past, when in truth most people might not even know them.

I think I read somewhere that any poster has at least read what the first respondent has....

I do read the OP's posts, the colour thingie is very helpful, and I do a quick visual sample to see who the other posters are, then reply or not. Not all threads are interesting on second glance or develop into a great discussion, they're often same-y and predictable so sometimes I'll just respond to the OP without reading the rest and, do you know what, OP? I'm free to do that.

The recent thread (that's now deleted) about the Sky geezer and his shoe Really? Thats been deleted? For all the cries of troll? Bit of a shame if the OP is for real and genuinely appreciated the words of support for her decision to leave the goon.

I agree with others, I think it makes for a more cohesive thread if people at least make sure they read the OPs posts before passing comment. Its easy if you've got OP highlighted.

There have been some good points on this thread, although I've not bothered to read them

Loving 'control freak'

SurprisEs - it's not about a new subject though - it's a continuation of the original post. Just more information that half the time, loads of posters don't bother to read.

Well, they still have a right to an opinion, but it tends to look fairly stupid jumping in with an opinion based only on the OP, when the conversation has moved on in the meantime. Its worth at least skimming the OPs posts to see if there is a change of heart, or something else which makes a big difference - and now that we have the OP Highlighter option, its easy to see them!

See... Worra has posted and she's one of the posters I like to post with... I was going to put that in post but it sounds horribly stalkerish.

Also, that point about remembering things about people... if you do, they often think you're hounding them. Agree about the drip-feeding too, very irritating.