 sj |
||
|
||
Reading threads & not posting?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Rowan Date: 21 May 07 - 03:17 AM Joe's message about the thread being targetted for spamming (at the bottom of JiK's post of 16 May) was spot on. About an hour or so before this message I counted 31 spam URLs in the one message. That post will soon be deleted by Mudelfs but it seems a lot of the older threads get resurrected this way. If you just happened on the thread and saw a long gap with no obvious reason for the resurrection, this would be why. But mostly I just read. Cheers, Rowan |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: astro Date: 16 May 07 - 05:21 PM I''m new here at Mudcat and am still fishing about to see what bites and what doesn't....so I read much and not posting yet... |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: wysiwyg Date: 16 May 07 - 04:11 PM Been here for hours, nuttin' to say. Last hour, Workin' on some Total Recorder ZZ Top stuff for aquajogging, counting out the beat, fingers too busy to post. ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: bet Date: 16 May 07 - 03:23 PM I open a lot of threads and read them. I do not add to them unless I know something that will add to knowledge of others about the subject. I learn a lot! bet |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: JohnInKansas Date: 16 May 07 - 03:34 AM Joe - That's sort of what I figured when I started figurin'. I don't seem to lose my login cookie, but sometimes the cookie that keeps track of which threads I've seen seems to get dropped and the thread turns back to "unread" in the listings. That's probably what made it look like someone had posted when I noticed it again. John |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: JohnInKansas Date: 16 May 07 - 01:42 AM Curiously, when I posted after PoppaGator's "final post" (18 Nov 04 - 06:11 PM) I had watched, and read, this thread a couple of times before deciding to add to it. It seemed to have "moved up" at least once, but there now are no posts that would have brought it up or that would have moved it up (and turned it blue again) after it first appeared. Maybe I need to check my meds, but I'm quite sure it was up in the current day's postings when I opened it for that post. I will not contradict PoppaG's self-evaluation in his post at that point. ... John
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: PoppaGator Date: 15 May 07 - 02:46 PM I'll write copiously if and when I'm in the mood ~ often when at work when I really shouldn't. Subject matter and/or my own expertise or lack thereof doesn't always matter as much as my whims. There are many threads I never open, but the ones I do peruse are not necessarily limited to subjects about which I have expertise. Sometimes I get curious about areas that are completely foreign to me and start reading about them at every opportunity. Example: Morris dancing ~ never heard of it outside Mudcat, still have never witnessed it, but find great amusement in how it is regarded by various members and will occasionally interject a wisecrack as though I knew what I was talking about, which I don't My last couple of posts on 18 Nov 04 (above) may be characteristic. In one, I fret about killing threads, being the final participant to mouth off before the discussion disappears; then, just a couple of messages later, I succeed in putting this one to death, or at least into a two-and-a-half-year coma. That temporarily-final post, by the way ~ the last one before JohnInKansas resurrected this ~ was not half-bad if I say so myself.. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: DonMeixner Date: 15 May 07 - 02:00 PM I don't post nearly as often as I did before. I do read as many. Mainly I won't post if I am reiterating something for the umpteenth time. "Best Guitar for Fingerpicking" stuff like that. I will help out with Lyric and chords as soon as I can. And I am not critical when someone asks for such. Don |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: RTim Date: 15 May 07 - 01:07 PM I ONLY read posts that I "think" I might be interested in - and then only write when I "think" I have something to say. So I may be missing a lot that I don't even look at - But I bet I am not often wrong? Tim Radford |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Scoville Date: 15 May 07 - 09:44 AM I read without posting. Sometimes somebody has already said what I was thinking. Sometimes I don't know enough about what's going on to add anything. Sometimes I miss the boat and the conversation has already drifted too far away from what I was going to add for my contribution to fit in (like right now). |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: JohnB Date: 15 May 07 - 09:38 AM Then there are the threads which go on a several year hiatus and then suddenly re-appear and continue as if it was just yesterday. JohnB, who reads a lot more than he posts to and seldom strays "below the line" JohnB |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: JohnInKansas Date: 14 May 07 - 07:21 PM I thought the guys (and gals) who work full time mostly have an office coffee pot always on so they never have to get up and make a pot, someone to clean up the office so they don't have to take out the trash, and probably someone to keep the files of their posting records neat so they can always sound intelligent, plus mostly high speed connections so they don't waste time waiting for downloads. While those of us who have to do it all for ourselves are at such an extreme disadvantage that it doesn't matter much how many hours we put into being clever here. Or maybe I've just forgotten what being a real person was like... John |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Rog Peek Date: 14 May 07 - 12:28 PM Yes Dick, you're probably talking about me on occasions, although if it's a very long thread and I haven't had time to read, I do tend to offer apologies if............. If it's a useful or interesting piece of information,(and before anyone comments,I'm not necessarily talking about my own posts), surely it's better to have it repeated trhan not posted atall. Time to read threads thoroughly, may very well be linked to cronological age. I, being semi-retired, may have more time than someone who works full time, whereas someone completely retired may have more time than me. Mmmmmmmm, I bet someone out there will find that a trifle contraversial! |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: dick greenhaus Date: 14 May 07 - 12:12 PM And then there are those who post to threads without reading them. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: JohnInKansas Date: 14 May 07 - 01:12 AM As to whether anyone knows the statistics of how many reader hits there are vs how many posts: 1. At the bottom of the page there are Google ads. 2. Google does not bother with places that do not have measurable traffic. 3. You may safely conclude that: GOOGLE KNOWS. And it's safe to assume that Max knows. My usual intention is to read much more than I post. I do however make a quick scan for threads where I might contribute something, and often the first thread I click on may require several hours, or in some cases days, of pondering, searching, and considering. (I will NOT admit that at times I do excessive research in hopes that someone else will come up with an answer before I get back, and your suspicions should be kept to yourselves.) I would much prefer to read more often than I post, and when there isn't an irresistible problem to be confangled, I sometimes manage to make it work that way. I will say that I always attempt to read the entire thread before posting, unless it's a very active one in which I've been involved and I've been following the stream on at least a daily basis. This is sometimes, perhaps, not the best idea; because often by the time I get to the end of reading the subject has changed and I end up not really inclined to participate in the direction it's going. But above all, when I do post, I TRY TO BE BRIEF. [Send your bets on who laughs first, and I promise I'll return at least 10% of the pot to the winner.] John |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: PoppaGator Date: 18 Nov 04 - 06:11 PM JP -- didja mean to say "windbags," or would "blowhards" be a better word? I like to think that, by allowing myself to be completely full of shit here at Mudcat, I'm able to be just a little bit more modest and self-effacing in real life. Well, I hope so anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Justa Picker Date: 18 Nov 04 - 04:22 PM I open threads that interest me (not many these days.) There are a number of posters here that I consider nothing more than "resident windbags" and I ignore and skip over their posts. Most of the time there isn't anything that compels me to write a post. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: GUEST,Blackcatter Date: 18 Nov 04 - 04:12 PM We've all had that experience Poppa. It is a weird feeling, certainly. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Paco Rabanne Date: 18 Nov 04 - 11:45 AM There you go Pop, I've saved you. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: PoppaGator Date: 18 Nov 04 - 11:39 AM "Now that I have gotten around to posting, I expect this thread to disappear soon." I know what you mean -- I don't know how many times I've posted a comment only to see the thread descend to the bottomof the page, never to return. My wife likes to scold me for always wanting to have the "last word," but making the last post to thread leaves me feeling a bit uneasy. I sure hope *this* does not mark the end of this thread! |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Mary in Kentucky Date: 18 Nov 04 - 08:23 AM I agree with blackcatter, especially the last two sentences. (Almost)all the people I respect have left, quietly. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Blackcatter Date: 17 Nov 04 - 11:25 PM Just prior to the hurricanes I stopped posting below the bar. Pretty much, I've stuck to that - only contributing to the hurricane threads (I live in Orlando, FL) and the Secret Santa threads, since I'm involved there. It's a shame that so many new people post questions that wind up getting flippant or downright insulting responses. At this point, I've almost stopped checking out threads I think might be by newbies simply because the stupid attitudes of certain people around here. I hope things get better around here, but Mudcat has turned into somewhat of an embarrassment in my mind. And I used to be one of the people who defended the Mudcat to members who said that. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: GUEST,.gargoyle Date: 17 Nov 04 - 11:03 PM If - Max/Joe/Pene elect to make them available to the general populus
The daily/hourly records of the Mudcat are a statistician's dream.
Most net-icians would be bored to tears - but to any sysop - they are the applause of an appreciative audience.
Sincerely,
Records even include which clone eliminates another drunkern sod's postings - (thank you joe - they needed it - as usual) |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: GUEST,Sargent Schultz (off Hogans Heroes) Date: 17 Nov 04 - 11:01 PM Mmmmm very interesting. I notice that u know who hasnt posted. I hope nothin has happenned to him. :<) |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: semi-submersible Date: 17 Nov 04 - 10:22 PM Grandma told Mom, "Don't speak unless you can improve the silence." I tell my son, "You can learn more with your eyes and ears than your mouth." (But none of us stopped talking long enough to listen.) Lurking is golden? Posting takes me lots of time and brain-sweat. A hit counter would only measure the appeal of the thread title, not the quality of the thread. Now that I have gotten around to posting, I expect this thread to disappear soon. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Cluin Date: 17 Nov 04 - 06:48 PM I only post to threads where I can use the word fuck in my post. Couldn't figure a way to do that in this thread though... |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Hollowfox Date: 17 Nov 04 - 06:44 PM Yep, I'm another one who reads more than she posts. Everybody who's written before me has pretty much said my reasons, too. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Deckman Date: 16 Nov 04 - 10:01 PM To Guest David ... You just hit the magic phrase for me ... FRIENDLY!!! When the postings get ascorbic, I'm outta there. Thanks for the perfect word. CHEERS, Bob |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: GUEST,David Ingerson from a different computer Date: 16 Nov 04 - 08:28 PM I read through the thread titles two to four times a week, read almost all the threads about traditional Irish songs plus another one or two that attract my attention--in all maybe four to eight threads at a session. I mostly lurk, posting maybe once a month or less. The press of time is the biggest reason for not posting more often. I have a list of threads that I think I can make a significant contribution to just waiting for when I have enough time. I'll get to them at one point or another. Of course, that's bullshit. The time is always there. When god made time, she made plenty of it. It's just my priorities on how I want to use it. Being a writer as well as a serious folk musician (and a bit of a perfectionist) has me taking a long time to create a post to send out to the whole world with my name on it that I'm satisfied with. Normally, I would spend the time to recast that last, horribly constructed sentence. But this time I'm just lettin' 'er rip. My thanks to all the many contributors I've learned so much from. This is an amazingly potent site for folk music information. The humor and friendly cyber-connections between posters are added value. Thanks, everyone, for making this a good place to come. David Ingerson |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Blowzabella Date: 16 Nov 04 - 02:25 PM Thanks to everybody who has taken the time to post to this thread - especially those who don't post to many, as a rule! I was never seeking to change anything, by the way, it was just a question out of curiosity. I seem to be much like everyone else - I read a lot more than I post to, and my reasons for not posting, when I don't are the same as many of those here - sometimes I'm not witty, or knowledgeable enough, sometimes I don't want to enter into something which looks heated, sometimes I haven't got time. At least now I know...it's not just me! I am normal (well, sort of... *G*) Blowz |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: PoppaGator Date: 16 Nov 04 - 12:56 PM I definitely vote for keeping the format as-is: KISS ("Keep It Simple, Stupid!"). It is definitely easier to scan through Mudcat, quickly read a lot of stuff, decide what deserves a closer look, etc., than it is to deal with most other (newer format) online forums I see. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: The Beast of Farlington Date: 16 Nov 04 - 11:18 AM Mudcat uses a very simple (and early?) form of bulletin board technology. It suits the virtually-unmoderated style of the forum. There are more recent bulletin board packages such as YABB and PHB which can show which threads have been viewed and how many times, how many times each poster has posted etc etc which I am sure many have seen elsewhere. Sites such as musesmuse.com and songstuff.com use this type of technology. But you would have to canvas the management to get them to change the look of mudcat and I sense that a lot of people here like it just as it is. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Dipsodeb Date: 16 Nov 04 - 11:09 AM I log on every day to get my mudcat fix, it's an essential part of the morning, like reading the paper. I rarely post unless it's to ask or answer a question that I feel very confident about. I suppose for very similar reasons to those exspressed above. I find it a great source of knowledge and have learnt bundles from going through all the posts BS as well as knowledge. I have alot of respect for some the catters and their views and will always pick out their posts and read them. I often feel quite intimidated by the sheer amount of knowledge and don't feel that my pennyworths gong to make any great difference. ~Debs~ |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull Date: 16 Nov 04 - 07:10 AM Max posted a while ago that about 98% of the people that use Mudcat never post anything. There are a few other folk music websites that I regulary read, but never post to, [www.thesession.org etc]. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: freda underhill Date: 16 Nov 04 - 06:53 AM I'd also be interested to be able to see how many people went to a thread. Why? dont know, but i would. i read a lot more than i post, but i know i post too much. mudcat is like reading the news, sometimes the news is boring, sometimes its fascinating. there are some people i'm continually impressed by - i'm glad i have the opportunity to read their jokes, learn from them, etc. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Dead Horse Date: 16 Nov 04 - 06:45 AM I am not posting to this thread because I've got nothing interesting to add, can't think of anything witty, and because it has a boring title. All the above are by my own standards of course, as I don't have to submit this via an editor. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: mack/misophist Date: 15 Nov 04 - 01:37 PM Some threads rapidly devolve into personal exchanges. I tend to avoid them. Some threads become too bitter. Unless it's a subject I have strong feelings about, I avoid them, too. Some threads are too silly. Unless it's just the right level of silliness. I eschew them utterly. Most of the music threads are beyond my reach because of my ignorance. I suspect I'm quite average. Then there are the "who are you and what do you do" threads. I fail to see the interest but often post anyway. I have too much free time. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: PoppaGator Date: 15 Nov 04 - 01:07 PM Like everyone, I read more than I post (believe it or not). Confession: I spend more time on Mudcat at work than I do at home. The number -- and even moreso, the length -- of my posts is somewhat determined by how busy I am, whether the boss is over my shoulder, etc. There are some threads that I read but to which I never post -- those on topics about which I know *nothing,* but which intrigue me by their very infamiliarity-- for example, Morris dancing. Sometimes I'll be reading with no intention of making a contribution until I find myself reacting to some detail or "subtopic" introduced by another member. That's when thread creep sometimes sets in. There's no way I could have let *this* thread, on *this* topic, go by without adding something. That probably tells you all you need to know. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: SINSULL Date: 15 Nov 04 - 12:58 PM Interesting thread, Blowz. I have two thoughts. One of the people who admit they haven't read through previous posts and then proceed to agree or disagree what they think probably has been posted. ?????? Then of my absolute favorite thread - Walt Robertson. I read it every day first and last and didn't post until it looked as if it might drop off the bottom. My post was to beg for more. I had nothing to offer. Don Firth PM'd me that day with some words of wisdom I have treasured ever since. I watch for our own Walts at every gathering now and keep close tabs on the memories. The latest - Elizabeth LaPrelle and Jeri as songwriter. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Geoff the Duck Date: 15 Nov 04 - 12:47 PM Counting the number of times a thread is opened isn't necessarily a good measure. I open multiple threads to save having to wait for a new one to load up. Sometimes I manage to read them all, other times I have to break off for other jobs before I get to the ones at the bottom of the pile. If a thread is a new one, I don't know if I am interested in it until AFTER I have opened it. Some I close as soon as I have scanned the first posting (or the name of the first poster). Others I read in full. Long threads sometimes need several visits to actually wade through before I reach the point where I can decide if I wish to post. In general I open threads which have intriguing titles. Some are worth reading - otheres deserve to be ignored. I post when I think I can be of help, or if I can make an entertaining comment. Otherwise I mainly just read. Quack! GtD. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Maryrrf Date: 15 Nov 04 - 10:58 AM I rarely post even when I think I might be able to contribute something because I never know how things will be taken and I don't want to start arguments, receive chiding, acrimonious or patronizing replies, etc. I know this is only virtual reality but to to tell the truth although I like some Mudcatters and I really value the information that can be found here, I don't find Mudcat a very friendly place much of the time. There are nice folks, yes, but there are some very impatient, sarcastic and not very nice people too and I often will type out a post, consider it from all angles to try to MAKE SURE that it couldn't possible generate any animosity, only to then think "Screw it, why bother" and delete it without sending. If we could somehow get people to be more courteous I think we'd get more posters and possibly even more interesting information. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Pete Jennings Date: 15 Nov 04 - 09:19 AM I'm always wary about posting to threads cos they tend to sink without trace shortly thereafter... |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Nick Date: 15 Nov 04 - 09:06 AM ALL forums are the same. I used to have a yahoo club with 1000 members of which perhaps 30 or 40 would post at all and of those perhaps 4 or 5 would post regularly. A friend posts to a songwriting site where a handful of the visitors post. Another friend has a forum with 350 registered users (only registered users can contribute) where he does record the views - some typical threads will have 70 replies on almost 3900 views. In another thread there are 762 replies with 42262 views. Amongst his 350 registered users 3 post very regularly (!!), with perhaps another 10 posting now and again. Is a lot of it to do with ego? I know a lot of people who read in various places but would not dream of posting. About the only positive I could see for having a note of the number of viewers of a thread would be if noone replies - if 00's or 000's of people have looked and not given an answer it might be pointless to keep trying, if noone has it might be worth re-phrasing the question and trying again to get the answer. |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Mrs_Annie Date: 15 Nov 04 - 08:54 AM I feel compelled to post on this one! I come in and browse most days, but only post when I think I have something relevant to say. (or want to ask a q myself) It's always nice when that gets acknowledged. Anne |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: A Wandering Minstrel Date: 15 Nov 04 - 08:21 AM read many, post to few always try to respond to lyric requests if I know the words(depends on the state of my ailing memory) I post a lot less than I used to as I try and avoid the politics |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Paco Rabanne Date: 15 Nov 04 - 03:07 AM I prefer things my way round. I post but don't read. oh.... I'll get my coat! |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: YorkshireYankee Date: 15 Nov 04 - 02:52 AM Like most have said above, I read way more threads than I post to – and for many of the same reasons. Reasons I don't post: I'm not knowledgable enough to add anything useful, or somebody else has already "said" what I would say. Lack of time: For me at least, trying to compose a coherent, thoughtful post takes a significant amount of time & effort, and I don't always have the time and/or the energy for it. Not "knowing" the person involved: This is in the case of threads where someone is in the hospital/ill/condolences, etc. I sometimes think maybe I should post, whether I "know" them/they "know" me or not, because even good wishes from someone you've never heard of can be encouraging, I suppose – but to me it feels inappropriate to post unless the person in question doesn't feel like a "stranger" to me. And lastly (and most disturbingly) – fear (every now and then...): I am sometimes tempted to criticise a thoughtless, nasty post (especially when it's by someone who seems to delight in such things on a regular basis), but refrain... partly because I suspect that it won't help & will even make things worse/help derail the thread (I tend to figure the best way to deal with such posts is to ignore them); but partly – I'm ashamed to admit – because it seems quite possible to me that if I criticise these people, they may well decide to make me a preferred target. I suppose that makes me a coward. I like to think that I'd be willing to stand up to them if it would actually help someone else, but that may just be a sop to my conscience – I suppose I won't really know until/unless it happens... |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: JennyO Date: 14 Nov 04 - 09:38 PM Hey Freightdawg, I read your thread without posting - oops, I posted :-) Now that I'm here - I do a lot more lurking than posting it seems. Almost every day, I skim through all the titles and open (and trace) all the ones that interest me, which is about 1 in 5 of the music threads and a larger proportion of the BS threads - I generally avoid the political ones though. I usually only post to a music thread if I have some information to add, but I like to play around with the BS ones and add something if I have time. How much I post usually depends on how much time I have. Lately I don't seem to have had much time to add long posts, so there have been a fair few one-liners. There have been some which I would have liked to reply to at length, but never got around to because of lack of time. I like to drop into the chat sometimes too, but not so much lately - I only do that if there is time - there was one memorable one where a bunch of us were "singing" doo wop songs - I wouldn't mind doing that again! In the two years I have been here I have posted on average 2-3 times a day, and that includes periods when I have been away too. Some days it might be not at all, and others it might be 7 or 8. It's easy to forget that if you don't post at all, nobody knows you have been here. I may have been laughing my head off at all sorts of funny things, or enjoying threads like "Divided we fall", but nobody knows. In fact, I think this has been my longest post for some time, I suspect. Gotta go, my garden is calling......... |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: GUEST,reggie miles Date: 14 Nov 04 - 09:14 PM Freightdawg, I was going to do just that, (read and not post). I echo what many here have said regarding posting habits. There are many threads that I have bookmarked and have not yet had the chance to revisit. Where does the time go? |
|
Subject: RE: Reading threads & not posting? From: Leadfingers Date: 14 Nov 04 - 08:45 PM Just out of MudChat two hours after coming home from a session !! I log in Every Day and glance through , and actually look at the threads I have posted to , and any new ones . Like a lot of people I tend to ignore the Flamers and Trolls, but try to answer any proper questions , if I can . |
| Share Thread: |