To think if you don't RTFT do you feel a bit silly...

[LaMarschallin]

...when you castigate someone and they say "But I apologised 2 pages back"?9

Taat?

But yes that’s why we should all rtft if anything but to save ourselves from looking like tits.

I don't think people who don't RTFT care about looking silly or would even notice TBH. They are already off to the next thread to post their words of wisdom.

You probably do but you deserve it. If you don't want to read the thread properly then don't respond to it. It's not hard.

I thought you got a really hard time.

Marvin she meant the eleventy billion others who didn't read it properly.

No, they clearly never do.

On the rare occasion I’ve done it. For instance, I thought a thread was one page long when actually it was seven, so I had missed a lorra, lorra detail, which made my contribution irrelevant and somewhat unkind. So I emailed MN to ask then to remove it. Seemed like a no-brainer. ¯\(ツ)/¯

It’s the ones who announce they haven’t read the thread, even when the thread is a mere three pages deep, that me. How can you possibly think anything you contribute could be at all relevant?

”Haven’t RTFT and I don’t know if anyone has mentioned it yet but why don’t you try...”

Yes love, 40,000 hive minds got there before you, you twat.

I thought you got a really hard time. cakebrew

Ah, is it this OP who didn’t read the thread?

How awkward!

It is perfectly reasonable to not read the full thread and post, though sensitivity should prevail. Non-sensitive subject matter can take OP’s post at face value and reply to that. There is no requirement to read 30 odd pages to give advice on whether it’s madness to commute 70 miles each way to earn an extra £30k per annum. But RTFT might be required if a DW has done a runner with the kids.

No, never.
I only read the full thread if I want to, if by some chance it has become interesting. Usually, I'm interested in the opening post and my response to it. I don't actually care what a load of randoms think, so why would I read? And I laugh at the internet bullies who want to insist we all comply to their expectations. 'If you don't want to read the thread properly then don't respond to it'? Who made you boss of the internet?
But... perhaps we could have a way of marking posts that are responding directly to the opening post? Sometimes people are kind enough to say so, and that's fair.

It is perfectly reasonable to not read the full thread and post, though sensitivity should prevail. Non-sensitive subject matter can take OP’s post at face value and reply to that.

I do think some of the situations could be avoided if the OP was allowed to update their original post somehow.

Butchyrestingface

I thought you got a really hard time.

Ah, is it this OP who didn’t read the thread?

No. And I'm fairly sure Redshoeblueshoe knows that.

I always do try to RTFT.

No. And I'm fairly sure Redshoeblueshoe knows that

Oh, pheww. Although I don’t understand that poster’s comment then.

as in cancel the cheque?

slipperywhensparticus

as in cancel the cheque?

Yes, exactly that.

Often posters feel they're being so original when, in the background, people are saying "No, no - I made a mistake and I've apologised".

Butchy because people were being really nasty to the OP. There was no point in me posting on the other thread about this as it was already completely derailed by people moaning about LaMa

@PlasticPatty - totally agree with you, sometimes it's good to post your first reaction to the original post, if all the info was in it then it shouldn't be a problem.

More annoying is all the posters that respond to the original thread having not read it properly

It is perfectly reasonable to not read the full thread and post,

It is not perfectly reasonable to not read the OP's updates.

And it's often useful to at least read the last couple of posts before yours. They're often illuminating.

When people post RTFT, I think they must be a bit sad and not have much of s life if they've time to read 9 pages 🙄

If a thread's that long I don't read it at all or post, as I assume everything's already been said anyway.

They don't mean literally RTFT, just OPs posts. And the couple of posts above your own as pp said.

unfortunately I think a large amount of the time they do mean all the thread

Bloomburger

When people post RTFT, I think they must be a bit sad and not have much of s life if they've time to read 9 pages 🙄

Fair enough.
However, it is frustrating for someone to post something three or more posts on from the OP and then get picked up on it when they've apologised.

But fair play, Bloomburger, you're off having a life...

But you're still posting here.

Do you join in RL conversations without knowing what someone else has said?

I do read all the OPs threads and but not everyone else's.

No I don't think I do join in conversations where something may have already been said but then a convert that would take 9 pages to transcribe would be 😴

Just eating an early lunch quickly before popping to see a client, wish I had time to sit and read 9 pages!

In a lot of threads there’s often some ridiculous drip feed half way through though, so where someone thinks they’re answering the original question through no fault of their own, they’re not.

Drip feeders do my head in!

I know this is different to your grievance OP.

So instead of RTFT, to be precise we need RTOP (Read The OP's Posts) or RTOPATOAY (Read The OP's Posts And The One Above Yours)

Not sure they'll catch on...