to think there should be fecking rule...

[TheOrchardKeeper]

that you read the whole bloody post before you add your nugget of wisdom?

Feel quite sorry for some posters who've added things on that have been missed, so have been slated on misinformation/not enough information.

Unless you enjoy being judgey, in which case, feel free to slate me below

Thanks

TL:DR. But I LOVE being judgey so you should LTB and he is BU.

I completely agree with that everlong . If anything that's more annoying.

But it's easy to miss a few bits that you don't think are that important.

Haven't been on here for a week or two & forgot how often people jump in with some of the more delicate posts before they've got the full picture.

Suppose it's the risk you take when you post though.

just forgot how often people seem to do it!

I really should, shouldn't I? And he really is...

Actually, now I've gone back and read the full post, I do completely agree. I've seen this on numerous threads and it always annoys me!

I once made the longest ever first post on MN, in the interests of not drip feeding, and I still had to add other bits to it.

I think I should have a prize. Perhaps a small medal next to my name or something.

But it is quite difficult when you are feeling het up about something to remember everything you wanted to say. You (I) miss bits out and go off on tangents and then realise you've (I've) missed something important but included three lines of irrelevant nonsense.

But you can tell from most of your posts you mean well ever'

Not that I'm stalking you

I posted in relationships YONKS ago. Really long, detailed first post & it still had bits missing that were needed to explain a few things/answer what people had asked etc.

Dripfeeding on purpose should be illegal though, obvs

Nuggets are bad IMO. Your DC should only be eating organic, homegrown vegetables. YABU.

does it count if I make my own out of dried cereal, jam & chocolate/other various organic-lover offenders ?

I am however, guilty of doing one of the other things that bugs me.

Not putting an obvious title on the thread so you 'have' to read it to know what it's actually about.

Grr me

I sometimes need information to be drip-fed to me otherwise my brain hurts.

It's only when the information completely changes the context of the original post that it becomes a problem IMO.

That's what I mean though lady'

Sometimes, the op's just accidently missed something out that does change the whole issue.

(Like the one a few hours ago about the woman who sounded like she was starving herself & wanted a medal for being skinny after a baby...turned out she was scared of pooping as she'd had bad tears with her DC & was still in pain etc).

Sorry for the thread-about-a-thread...

I loved the thread the other day (on food banks and treats) where the op agreed she had BU, but people kept piling in slating her without reading the thread.

Or even starting a thread about a thread
Oh wait there is....

I see what you mean Orchard. There are times when posters "open up" on support threads as they feel more comfortable with sharing information or following feedback from posters.

I've not read the full thread but YABU OP.

HTH.

I highlight the OP - I scan past all the advice, only read the Ops posts - unless it's 16 pages long, in which case I deduce the Op is either getting slated or mass brackets of love and read the last 20 posts to see the current tone

I didn't start a thread about about a thread...actually.

I started a thread about lots of threads.

There is no rule against that, non?

BOO

Did I scare you?

Drip feeding is the problem. People (troll) come along and tell half a story, then all hell lets loose.