Poll: TL;DR: Acceptable or not?

[Griffolion]

Some people don't have the time, patience, or attention span to read through a long-winded post, even though there could very well be legitimate points included in it.
In fact, in business writing there's such a thing as an executive summary, which is basically a TL;DR for an entire report. (Presumably business executives don't have the time, patience, or attention span to read through a business report in it's entirety.)

TL;DR:
I find it useful when one is included in a long post. It helps summarize the points covered in a more concise fashion.

There's also a TL;DR in academia, it's called the abstract. I dunno, if a TL;DR is included by the author then that's cool because it get's the salient points across alongside the meat & potato passage, which is being considerate more than anything else.

 

[4173]

Skip reading a post for whatever reason you like.


Responding to a post with tl;dr is stupid and rude. It ranks right up there with advertising who is on your ignored/blocked list.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

Some arguments require you to make a long and detailed response. When you're discussing US gun culture, or rape in the media, or feminism, or the death penalty (just examples) if you're not making a well thought out response then everyone ends up parrotting slogans or only making one line comments that don't actually progress the argument.

Also, on occasion there is a very detailed fan debate going on, for which history and backstory is needed. I've seen comic book debates on these forums where each post resembles a Wikipedia page, but that's needed, and if you're a fan you'll probably enjoy reading it, and if you're not a fan, what are you doing in the thread? This is also the general attitude I take, if you enter a debate on rape and don't expect for there to be long arguments, then I'd argue that you have very unrealistic expectations.

This debate also has to include the question of 'what is too long?' I know some people who would have already stopped reading my post by this point, and I don't think I've been rambling too much. Sure if I wrote a several thousand word essay in response you have a right to say that I'm tling, but an argument presented in separate paragraphs, each paragraph with a clear theme linking the argument together? That should be read, I believe.

And of course finally the content and format should be considered. If in my above examples someone has written an eight page essay of spelling mistakes, bad grammar and unreadable nonsense, with no paragraph breaks and dozens of fragment sentences, then it becomes a tl;dr. Even a relatively short post can become tl;dr if it is badly presented, and a rambling vaguely racist manifesto should never be read of course.

So to sum up (tl;dr) There are situations in which a long and detailed post is necessary and in fact preferred to a short post, which will not advance the argument. To dismiss someone's post automatically because you can't be bothered to read it is rude and unhelpful. However, when posting, please make sure that the majority of what you say is relevant to the argument, and provide a summary where appropriate.

 

[OutcastBOS]

Not at all. If someone took the time to type out their response, and it's coherent, you should take the time to read it through, boredom be damned. It lets you pick apart anything you don't agree with, praise what you DO agree with, and maybe even learn something in the process.

 

[Torrasque]

I think saying TL;DR is rude no matter what the circumstance is. Reading someone's random drivel for 3 pages that doesn't go anywhere, is just even more rude. I think it is a failure on the part of the poster if you are losing interest as you read, or they are getting boring and long winded.

When I feel like I am getting really ranty and wall-o-texty, I throw in an abridged version of my post at the end; a TL;DR version if you will.
I'd still like people to read my huge post, but often, the TL;DR version is good enough for casual conversation.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

I don't understand why you have "sometimes" as a poll response. Its a binary question: it either is or it isn't.
.

TL;DR means it's likely you as the OP have failed to either convey your message clearly and concisely, or failed to maintain your target's attention(who obviously were interested by the title but who you then lost in your rambling).

If you are making an OP about someone's favourite cheese or whether bacon should be served with breakfast, you don't need a Wall of Text. If you post a WoT for such a subject, then there should be a tl;dr summary, and it would be obvious you've failed to convey your message.

If you're writing a dissection of the Second Amendment and American gun culture and you try and summarise or write a post which isn't well thought out and probably quite long, then you'll miss important points that really should be discussed or included.

If someone calls tl;dr on the first example, then it's okay. If someone calls tl;dr on the second example, then it's the reader's fault for not expecting that such a serious topic might require some actual in-depth thinking instead of a couple of political blurbs.

Thus it can sometimes be appropriate to tl;dr, and sometimes you can't convey a message concisely without losing the actual point.

 

[shrekfan246]

Spewing out a wall of text is like standing on the street corner and raving incoherently. Don't be surprised or offended when people decline to pay attention to you.

There's a key difference between your analogy and how it's actually used these days, though. "TL;DR" as it's used today would be more like:
You're standing on a street corner raving incoherently and passersby start yelling about how they only heard your opening sentence but want to refute your ravings based on that one line anyway.

I have no issues with the theory of the TL;DR. If something is too long for you to invest your time in, or it's simply not interesting enough to hold you, don't read it. Nobody is forcing you to read it. But when you come across a forum post that's a few paragraphs long, only read the thread title and skip the actual opening post and then drop down to the Reply box to post out a response about how you didn't read it but have an opinion anyway, then what's the point? You don't even know if what you're posting will have any bearing on the discussion at hand, because you didn't read what the thread is actually about.

And the people who just post "TL;DR" and then a line or two so they don't get knocked for low-content are the absolute worst. Why even bother posting in the first place?

 

[tacotrainwreck]

There's nothing wrong with feeling that something is too long-winded for you to read and deciding to skip it. There IS something wrong with having to let the whole world know that that's how you feel. If you don't want to read it, don't even respond. It's actually a lot less rude than writing 4 letters that only imply you need everyone to know you can't be bothered to waste your precious time and would rather go back to Call of Duty for those 45 seconds.

 

[Aurora Firestorm]

I don't mind walls of text. I like books.

tl;dr is fine if you want to give a summary of your post, but I don't like it when people post it as a response, because that basically means "I have no time for you and your drivel." If you don't have time, why did you go to the thread and post a response to the OP in the first place? It's just rude.

Edit: Post above me beat me to it, but yeah.

 

[Hungry Donner]

I have no problem with people posting something lengthy, and then including a "tl;dr" summary. As for replies? I generally find such things pretty spammy. There are exceptions, generally if someone takes the time to respond to the general idea, but a lot of people seem to post these for the sake of posting.