Page 2 | What's this 'show more/show less' nonsense for?!

BIWI · 2026-07-08T14:01:00+00:00

It completely breaks up the flow of a thread. Do you really think we haven't got the brain power to read a post that's longer than two paragraphs?!

DramaAlpaca · Yesterday 15:31

I've just noticed this and I agree with everyone else. It's annoying; it's interrupting my reading flow. If it has to stay, please make it optional.

AnAutumnCrow · Yesterday 15:32

Optional would be good.

WallaceinAnderland · Yesterday 15:33

It seems to have gone now

Original poster

BIWI · Yesterday 15:35

WallaceinAnderland · Yesterday 15:33

It seems to have gone now

Thank goodness for that!

OP posts:

BabblingBiddy · Yesterday 15:39

BIWI · Yesterday 15:35

Thank goodness for that!

Show quote history

Its not gone, MN have said on another thread that they've extended the length before it appears.

I don't want it at all.

Original poster

BIWI · Yesterday 15:43

Bugger!

OP posts:

MNHQ

AmeliaPMumsnet · Yesterday 15:55

Hi all,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the change. We've rolled it back while we reconsider the cut-off point, as we agree we made it too short.

The aim was to make threads, particularly on mobile, easier to scan. We'd had feedback that very long posts can mean a lot of scrolling, which disrupts the flow of a thread. We're taking on board all of the feedback you've shared here, including the suggestions around opt out settings, but we're hoping that once we've adjusted the cut-off point, it will feel much less disruptive.

WallaceinAnderland · Yesterday 15:57

AmeliaPMumsnet · Yesterday 15:55

Hi all,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the change. We've rolled it back while we reconsider the cut-off point, as we agree we made it too short.

The aim was to make threads, particularly on mobile, easier to scan. We'd had feedback that very long posts can mean a lot of scrolling, which disrupts the flow of a thread. We're taking on board all of the feedback you've shared here, including the suggestions around opt out settings, but we're hoping that once we've adjusted the cut-off point, it will feel much less disruptive.

Scrolling is much easier than having to click a link.

Original poster

BIWI · Yesterday 15:57

Thank you @AmeliaPMumsnet I'm glad it's gone (at least for now).

I understand that longer posts might be difficult on a mobile - but why do you have to change things on the desktop site just to accommodate phone users?

OP posts:

WallaceinAnderland · Yesterday 15:58

Even on a phone, it's easy to scroll down a long post.

BigWillyLittleTodger · Yesterday 16:00

Why are they trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist?

Halsall · Yesterday 16:03

It's awful. I hate it.

DappledThings · Yesterday 16:06

AmeliaPMumsnet · Yesterday 15:55

Hi all,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the change. We've rolled it back while we reconsider the cut-off point, as we agree we made it too short.

The aim was to make threads, particularly on mobile, easier to scan. We'd had feedback that very long posts can mean a lot of scrolling, which disrupts the flow of a thread. We're taking on board all of the feedback you've shared here, including the suggestions around opt out settings, but we're hoping that once we've adjusted the cut-off point, it will feel much less disruptive.

What was the original cut-off word count and what are you proposing changing it to?

ImpPeril · Yesterday 16:06

AmeliaPMumsnet · Yesterday 15:55

Hi all,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the change. We've rolled it back while we reconsider the cut-off point, as we agree we made it too short.

The aim was to make threads, particularly on mobile, easier to scan. We'd had feedback that very long posts can mean a lot of scrolling, which disrupts the flow of a thread. We're taking on board all of the feedback you've shared here, including the suggestions around opt out settings, but we're hoping that once we've adjusted the cut-off point, it will feel much less disruptive.

On my mobile, I would much prefer to scroll past to having to click to see more. They are different operations and to need to alternate to the latter is more disruptive.

DrSpartacularsMagnificentOctopus · Yesterday 16:08

AmeliaPMumsnet · Yesterday 15:55

Hi all,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the change. We've rolled it back while we reconsider the cut-off point, as we agree we made it too short.

The aim was to make threads, particularly on mobile, easier to scan. We'd had feedback that very long posts can mean a lot of scrolling, which disrupts the flow of a thread. We're taking on board all of the feedback you've shared here, including the suggestions around opt out settings, but we're hoping that once we've adjusted the cut-off point, it will feel much less disruptive.

It's actually easier, and puts less strain on joints, to scroll than to have to reach across the phone to click 'show more'.

Chesspitofbacteria · Yesterday 16:45

It's bad enough that some people can't even be arsed to even read the OP (let alone any updates), but surely this will make it even worse as they will only read the text that appears before the cut off.

Look forward to many, many posts with "oops - didn't click the expand button"

Naurrr · Today 11:51

Can this be removed? Absolutely no need for it and not sure why you want people to read threads LESS.
As a PP said, we're not 'scanning', we are reading. If people are incapable of that, there's probably more suitable sites for them.

NoCommentingFromNowOn · Today 11:55

BigWillyLittleTodger · Yesterday 16:00

Why are they trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist?

And ignoring the problems that do exist.

DixonD · Today 14:46

AmeliaPMumsnet · Yesterday 15:55

Hi all,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the change. We've rolled it back while we reconsider the cut-off point, as we agree we made it too short.

The aim was to make threads, particularly on mobile, easier to scan. We'd had feedback that very long posts can mean a lot of scrolling, which disrupts the flow of a thread. We're taking on board all of the feedback you've shared here, including the suggestions around opt out settings, but we're hoping that once we've adjusted the cut-off point, it will feel much less disruptive.

What interrupts the flow of a thread is having to constantly click on posts to read them - not the length of the post itself.

Please make it optional, if you have to have it.

And I READ threads. I don’t scan them.

DixonD · Today 14:48

AmeliaPMumsnet · Yesterday 15:55

Hi all,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the change. We've rolled it back while we reconsider the cut-off point, as we agree we made it too short.

The aim was to make threads, particularly on mobile, easier to scan. We'd had feedback that very long posts can mean a lot of scrolling, which disrupts the flow of a thread. We're taking on board all of the feedback you've shared here, including the suggestions around opt out settings, but we're hoping that once we've adjusted the cut-off point, it will feel much less disruptive.

You just don’t need it - what’s the point? Has anyone ever complained about reading posts longer than 5 lines?

The issue people had was with long quote histories, not long posts.

Ineffable23 · Today 18:07

I think the scrolling problem was when you used to click to open a set of quotes and then they'd end up one letter long (which I see a fix has been released for) so it would be miles and miles long and there wouldn't be a way to collapse it again from the top.

Chesspitofbacteria · Today 19:27

@DixonD

Whilst I agree with you, there are frequently MN replies along the lines of:

"I haven't got time to read all that"
Well get off MN then!

"Can't read it as it is a wall of text"
Yes you can, you just can't be bothered.

"Could you repost with paragraphs"
It will be the same words, just with spaces for the hard of thinking.

"Could somebody summarise this for me"
No, read it or don't read it.

Or the old chestnut of "TLDR"
Don't bother commenting then.