Poll: How do you read huge forum threads?

[BirdKiller]

We've all seen threads that are extremely interesting, controversial, or significant. Some of these we want to voice our opinion/ideas, but there are hundreds of thousands of posts before you doing the same. For small threads, it's easy to read all of the posts to understand how the conversation is being carried out, but for large threads, most don't have the time nor interest to do so. For the most part, large threads don't seem to have any overall direction/development.

You could just post your thoughts from the initial post of the thread, ignoring all of the replies before you.

You could just read the last replies to jump on to the discussion

You could try to read most of them to get a better understanding of the topic

What do you usually do? Assume that the thread is interesting enough for you to respond to.

 

[Ljs1121]

If it's a forum game in which people mention specific users then I'll ctrl+f for Ljs1121.

If it's another type of thread I'll click through the pages (unless there's over 20) and look for some controversy/arguing. Internet fights are always entertaining. :3

 

[Eclipse Dragon]

I read the first couple pages to get an understanding of what's already been said.

At a certain point, new things stop happening and it's just people conversing, or the whole thing has broken into a flame war.

Then I jump to the last couple pages to get an idea of where things have gone.
If it's still somehow on topic, I'll add my two cents, otherwise I won't bother with the big ones when they get so large.

 

[Sean Hollyman]

I usually stay away from them for some reason.

Then again if it's one of my threads that has grown big, I'll read every post

 

[Iyon]

I read the first couple pages to get an understanding of what's already been said.

At a certain point, new things stop happening and it's just people conversing, or the whole thing has broken into a flame war.

Then I jump to the last couple pages to get an idea of where things have gone.
If it's still somehow on topic, I'll add my two cents, otherwise I won't bother with the big ones when they get so large.

This is exactly what I do also.

Though if it's a particularly interesting thread I'll probably just keep reading posts chronologically until I get bored.

 

[Eclipse Dragon]

I read the first couple pages to get an understanding of what's already been said.

At a certain point, new things stop happening and it's just people conversing, or the whole thing has broken into a flame war.

Then I jump to the last couple pages to get an idea of where things have gone.
If it's still somehow on topic, I'll add my two cents, otherwise I won't bother with the big ones when they get so large.

This is exactly what I do also.

Though if it's a particularly interesting thread I'll probably just keep reading posts chronologically until I get bored.

Some threads just become train wrecks, at which point, I really should stop reading, but for some reason I can't look away.

 

[Aris Khandr]

If it is worth responding to, it's worth reading the thread first. That said, the length of the thread can certainly have an effect on my threshold of "worth responding to".

 

[Fappy]

I read the flames and laugh usually. They are easy to spot.

 

[Sassafrass]

I scan over them and stop if I see a post that's either funny or incredibly stupid.
Or I see a Fillon gif. Then I just abandon thread. >_>

 

[DoPo]

I read the flames and laugh usually. They are easy to spot.

Yeah - anything with more than 4-5 pages is usually flames.

OT: Well, at some point there is no reason to post. If a thread has 5+ pages already, I doubt I'll say anything really new in the vast majority of cases. Then I either don't post or read the first couple of pages to see where things are going...or just go in it for the flames like Fappy. Otherwise, if I think I can contribute, I try to read the whole thread, so I'll at least skim the messages. If it turns out I have nothing to add, I revert to the previous point, if I do (could be something else I spotted in the thread), I just post.

At any rate, if there is a large thread I'm interested in, I'll probably read through it, at least until it stops being interesting.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

The longer the train, the bigger the crash >

Nah, I'm joking.

[sub][sub]I'm not joking.[/sub][/sub]

I'll skim over large threads, see if anything jumps out at me. I won't usually jump in unless I'm sure I've got something new to add.

 

[SciMal]

Read the first page or two:

OP: "So why don't Electricians/Physicists simply make new equations if they got the charge wrong over a centurty ago? It seems stupid to work under a convoluted model out of tradition."

Then I skip to a middling page:

Username37182: You're argument is full of logical fallacies, including two straw-mans and an appeal to authority. I'm not saying scientists SHOULDN'T be more acceptable of rectifying very obvious mistakes in order to make their disciplines easier to understand, but you're making it seem like I want to slaughter children.

And finally I skip to the last two pages:

WOLFVIRExx119: So you're saying I WOULDN'T die if I took an extension cord and shoved it up my ass to use my penis as an electrode that could cook the pumpkin I was fucking as long as the circuit was complete? You should probably just go jump off a cliff. Maybe your fantasy physics will save your ass, or maybe REALITY will happen.



Then I close the thread trying not to piss myself from laughter and go answer REAL science-related questions on Stack Exchange.

 

[Colour Scientist]

I scan over them and stop if I see a post that's either funny or incredibly stupid.
Or I see a Fillon gif. Then I just abandon thread. >_>

Yeah, I kinda hope that starts to die down soon. Well, mostly this one:

Spoiler

I actually don't mind the gif explosions when the thread is silly to begin with but for a while there it was every thread and that particular gif would show up on every page.

 

[Chromatic Aberration]

One post at a time.

I only respond if I can add something to the thread at large - and to assess that, I usually read through the large threads in their entirety before actually posting. But I do actually enjoy reading through most of the stuff, so it's not like I'd make myself more work than necessary; if a thread doesn't interest me - as happens with most of the overblown threads in OT - I won't bother to post at all and at the most skim through them....

 

[NewClassic_v1legacy]

I've taken to zoning out if a thread is even so large at 2 pages.

Most of the posts in any given thread tend to be people coming in, speaking an opinion, and leaving. In the face of that, it's pretty rare that what I have to say hasn't already been said in varying levels of detail, or put more eloquently. Even if what I could possibly say doesn't fit any of the previous posts, my expectation that it will be read and quoted is actually rather minimal, seeing as once it gets to that point, most users will skim a thread from end to end without stopping to read any post individually.

Most of the time, I end up just not posting at all. Between the .gifs, the pure speed of the forums compared to when I did most of my posting, and that most of the forum-goers these days are complete strangers to me, I tend to end up not posting. Even if I find the thread content to be really interesting. So, most of the time, I end up missing out on the thread entirely.

I'd also be lying if I said that my brief period modding didn't color my perception on larger threads a little.

Although honestly, it's usually just that there's nothing I can to say that hasn't already been said over and over by the time I find most threads. Folks like Daystar Clarion and Sassafrass have certainly sped up the forums much faster than I'm used to being able to consider how to say what I want to say, much less in actually saying it. Although they'll be an occasional opportunity that I find worth taking the time to post on or about.

Although I feel like given how personal questions like these are, I'm not even sure how much I'm contributing by answering.

 

[Esotera]

90% of the threads I comment in are under a page long, although I'll occasionally post in a longer one if it's very interesting or has trolled me enough. As a general rule of thumb, I've found that anything over 3 pages long tends to be different posters stating the same points over and over again.

The scary thread is probably the only one I've read most of the way through.

 

[Rowan93]

I picked "read some", because my typical strategy - read first 2/3 pages, read last 3/4 pages - wasn't there.

Well, that's for huge huge threads, if it's only like ten pages I'll probably read the whole thing, or just skim it, depending on how content-rich the thread actually is.

Although typically what I do with huge threads is just avoid them entirely, I like short ones best (that's what she said).

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

Forum games? One page at a time, two if it very recently flipped.

Off Topic? First few pages and a few of the last pages. Generally I want to see if the thread has gone downhill or has been terribly derailed. And I like reading what people have to say.

 

[Asita]

Depends on the content. I'm more likely to skim lighthearted threads like "I need some good tunes" than I am threads with a more argumentative tone.

 

[Andy Shandy]

Depends on the topic at hand of course, but generally I tend to read most, if not all of the replies. Especially if it's one of my threads.