tl;dr

Status
Not open for further replies.
i think its useful to let the poster know why you didn't read his post, its a succinct form of constructive criticism and maybe will alert the poster to say what's on his mind in fewer words, resulting in a more efficient ,to the point post.
 
Dogoid said:
i think its useful to let the poster know why you didn't read his post, its a succinct form of constructive criticism and maybe will alert the poster to say what's on his mind in fewer words, resulting in a more efficient ,to the point post.
Click to expand...

Nope, some things need to be said in that detail.

I write long posts like a newspaper article draft. More detail and less importance in each successive paragraph. You can often make a useful comment after just a little reading.

I think posting tl;dr and then your post would be acceptable, to say you didn't read it all.
 
BigglesPiP said:
Nope, some things need to be said in that detail.

I write long posts like a newspaper article draft. More detail and less importance in each successive paragraph. You can often make a useful comment after just a little reading.

I think posting tl;dr and then your post would be acceptable, to say you didn't read it all.
Click to expand...



then that's fine, its up to the poster to still carry on with longs posts, but it still would be useful to know the amount of people who had not read a post because they thought it was too long.

what if 9 out of 10 people who posted in a thread alerted the poster that it was too long to read, would it be wise to still continue the same way? the same for a journalist working for a newspaper, would it be wise for him to still carry on writing his articles the way he sees fit, regardless of nationwide criticism.?
 
Dogoid said:
then that's fine, its up to the poster to still carry on with longs posts, but it still would be useful to know the amount of people who had not read a post because they thought it was too long.

what if 9 out of 10 people who posted in a thread alerted the poster that it was too long to read, would it be wise to still continue the same way? the same for a journalist working for a newspaper, would it be wise for him to still carry on writing his articles the way he sees fit, regardless of nationwide criticism.?
Click to expand...

If 9/10 people don't read my thread I don't give a ****.

I'll stop and chat with the 1/10 who have a measurable IQ. ;)
 
Sounds fair enough to me. If something seems too long to read, then why bother posting anything at all, let alone tl;dr. Makes no sense to me, and it's just rude if somebody needs help.

I can't think of a single instance in which I've felt the need to use it. There's a back button on web browsers for just these occasions.
 
Dogoid said:
then that's fine, its up to the poster to still carry on with longs posts, but it still would be useful to know the amount of people who had not read a post because they thought it was too long.

what if 9 out of 10 people who posted in a thread alerted the poster that it was too long to read, would it be wise to still continue the same way? the same for a journalist working for a newspaper, would it be wise for him to still carry on writing his articles the way he sees fit, regardless of nationwide criticism.?
Click to expand...

I can't work out whether you're being facetious or not, but my response would be to use the back button and ignore the thread completely if you can't be bothered reading the OP. That way, if everyone does this, the thread will fall off the first page and the OP will realise this the more threads they create that people aren't interested in or don't reply to.

Posting tl;dr has no benefit whatsoever.
 
i am being slightly facetious, and playing a bit of devils advocate. sometimes i just like to argue a losing argument to test the vigour of people.

i have never posted tl;dr , but i argue that maybe instead of not allowing posters to do so, may be a disadvantage to a poster as he would not be privy to the possible negative aspects of his post .

it seems to me that banning people for posting their opinion about a posts longevity is a free speech issue more than a need to keep things tidy and in order. and with that said, i would advise that people continue with thier succinct abbreviations just as long as nobody gets hurt in the process.
 
Dogoid said:
i am being slightly facetious, and playing a bit of devils advocate. sometimes i just like to argue a losing argument to test the vigour of people.

i have never posted tl;dr , but i argue that maybe instead of not allowing posters to do so, may be a disadvantage to a poster as he would not be privy to the possible negative aspects of his post .

it seems to me that banning people for posting their opinion about a posts longevity is a free speech issue more than a need to keep things tidy and in order. and with that said, i would advise that people continue with thier succinct abbreviations just as long as nobody gets hurt in the process.
Click to expand...
Don't you find it weird that someone can be bothered to state they couldn't be bothered to read the thread though?
 
Dogoid said:
i am being slightly facetious, and playing a bit of devils advocate. sometimes i just like to argue a losing argument to test the vigour of people.

i have never posted tl;dr , but i argue that maybe instead of not allowing posters to do so, may be a disadvantage to a poster as he would not be privy to the possible negative aspects of his post .

it seems to me that banning people for posting their opinion about a posts longevity is a free speech issue more than a need to keep things tidy and in order. and with that said, i would advise that people continue with thier succinct abbreviations just as long as nobody gets hurt in the process.
Click to expand...

Not been here long have you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom