OPs Being Terrified of Upsetting the Regulars

[strawberrisc]

Every time I see an OP tentatively promising to “try not to dripfeed” or insisting that “this isn’t a reverse” or a “stealth boast” that they’re conditioned by our little nest of vipers to format their question to suit the MN masses? I cringe when a non-regular gets torn to pieces by old MNetters for breaking these cardinal yet unwritten rules. AIBU to be ready to be bitten by vipers for said view? 🐍

Yanbu it can seem very cliquey at times.

I agree. Whilst it’s annoying when there’s dripfeeding, people shouldn’t be scared to post. The amount of times I’ve written out a thread or a comment and decided it’s not worth the agro is countless.

Theres no time limit on writing an op.

If you want correct advice/ opinions then give all pertinent information

I dont even look at posters names. Couldnt give a toss if its your first post or youve been on mn for 10 years

Dripfeeding is only a bad thing when you've not mentioned something clearly important.

E.g.. Should I leave my DH because he didn't wash a teaspoon.

2 pages later.

"He also had an affair, killed the cat and doesn't like chocolate".

Drip feeding is incredibly annoying, and also sometimes very manipulative.

As a pp said, I very rarely notice usernames unless it’s someone I particularly like or dislike.

Reverses are also irritating.

I've been on MN for years and couldn't name a single 'regular'. I don't really look at usernames. As for being 'cliquey'? I always thought a clique was something to aspire to join. MN is just a website!

I think it's sad when the OP feels the need to prove they've been here years by mentioning or hashtagging popular or classic past threads. What does it matter really? I guess it's to try and prove they're not a troll but it's really not necessary.

I get annoyed when people say 'Oh, not again, this topic has been done to death'. There will be people joining MN every day so every topic is new to them. Bit of a stupid comment really!

It’s not about “being terrified of regulars” it’s about following the conventions of the community.

MN is a community, it has its own conventions, history, language and traditions.

None of which are terribly difficult to pick up.

There are very good reasons not to drip feed or write reverses, and stealth boasts are just a bit cringe worthy (MN as rule is pretty positive about actual boasts though if you are open about it).

E.g.. Should I leave my DH because he didn't wash a teaspoon

2 pages later

"He also had an affair, killed the cat and doesn't like chocolate"

I would have no problem with this. If the OP is happy with the affair, cat-killing and chocolate, and it's the teaspoon that is her breaking point, then fine.

Mysteries aren't well-received here either.

People drip feed not because they are scared or forget, they do it to try and manipulate responses because more often or not the ‘drip feed’ would have a major impact on the responses which they just aren’t ready to hear.

I understand the desire to treat incidents as isolated incidents in a quest for an ‘unbiased’ response but there’s often ‘a pattern’ that the OP is deliberately trying to avoid. If someone takes the time to craft a response, only to find a couple of posts later that it was a waste of time because a drip feed rendered the considered response pointless then it does impact MN as a whole because why would you bother? People aren’t not posting out of fear, it’s more likely borne out of denial.

The idea that there’s this gang of MN OG’s running around bullying unsuspecting newbies is rather pathetic. We are grown ups and yes there is often robust discussion, sometimes the truth is hard to hear but it doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be said.

I think drip feeding happens because the OP is asking advice on only one issue and have given the info that they consider relevant to their question. Then as people start asking questions the OP provides more background information which then changes everything.

So what the OP saw as the main problem is actually a symptom of much bigger problems.

Then everyone jumps on them and accuses them of drip feeding.

There are a few irritations (minor) I'd like to start threads on with my DH, but I also know that if I mention his behaviour from 15 years ago, the minor issues would be ignored and I'd be told to LTB most likely.

I understand the desire to treat incidents as isolated incidents in a quest for an ‘unbiased’ response but there’s often ‘a pattern’ that the OP is deliberately trying to avoid

I think this is insightful.

I think the best outcome of a thread is when a poster eventually does bring out the bigger stuff that may be bothering them. It means the thread has done a great job of getting them to unload and sort it all out. It may have started off on a small thing, but that does not matter, I feel.

If we go onto threads to help people if we can, then all's well that ends well.

The dripfeeding thing is starting to annoy me. Obviously it's sometimes directly relevant but I've seen a lot lately of ops being criticised for dripfeeding something that really DIDN'T need to be mentioned in the op, it's just a peripheral but answers a question someone asked... Then also a fair number of responses criticising the op as too long! Be fair!

Some people use MN to vent their rage at life.

Doesn't bother me, I'm just glad I don't know them in RL

But yes I do feel huge sympathy for newbies at times, who've perhaps had to think long and hard about asking about a difficult subject to them.

Most drip-feeders do it because the thread isn't going how they expected, so they drop in a massively gamechanging piece of information.

If you find it cliquey now, you should have been here about 6-8 years ago. I always assume also that anyone who goes "cubes of poo, rivers of sweetcorn, pombears" is going to come up with a try-hard-to-get-into-classics pile of bollocks.

I used to get shouted at for drip feeding all the time. Problem is when I include all the info in the op it's too long and people only read half of it.

I once started a thread in chat and somebody linked to someone else's post on the same topic and effectively told me "this has been done before - duh!" The thread thy linked to was over 5 years old!

BookMeOnTheSudExpress

Most drip-feeders do it because the thread isn't going how they expected, so they drop in a massively gamechanging piece of information.

I think this is often true especially in AIBU, although I also agree that some posters ask a question about an isolated incident that turns out not to be so singular after all.

I find the first the most annoying, but on the whole I don’t “invest” in threads where the OP is being obtuse.

Re regulars, there are relatively few posters that I recognise nowadays, and I tend to assume that like me, they have name changed a few times. I think if you are feeling in need of ADvanced Searching a particular poster, the thread is probably not for you.

Who are the regulars?

I say sometimes in threads that I'm trying not to drip feed and it is because I'm trying not, rather than I live in fear of offending someone!

There used to be a lot of recognisable regulars. Now the only names I recognise are AnyFucker, SparklingBrook and BertieBotts. I haven't a clue with anyone else how long they have been here.

Acats- I agree with you about that. I used to see that a lot- snarky comments by the Queens of Mumsnet. Not so much these days thankfully.

yes I agree, I hate the 'I'm an oldie..pom bears...cancel the cheque'

We can all post on here, we don't need to justify or tell our story in a way prescribed by others- totally agree OP!