Community Chat

[Montana]

I usually read through most threads, but there are a few types I dont.

If the OP has a problem and obviously is not returning to acknowledge the help people took the time to give him/her, then I’m out.

I also do not read threads when an OP complains about the exact same situation over and over again. And continues to ignore all advice or suggestions.

[Gorgf]

Sometimes I will click on the last page of posts first as they are the most recent. Especially  the longer threads.

[SunValley]

If two posters start trading barbs, complete with quoting, I lose interest and will wait till they are done and then read the following posts. Sometimes this takes some patience. I know I have added my thoughts to a post that has lost traction, and if someone hearts my thoughts I appreciate it. I have read some very thoughtful responses from posters who read the different sides of the issue and offer a different perspective.

[Sweetbay magnolia]

 FYI - Under the box with the poster's info, there is a "message #" and "# of views" tally for every response.

[mspatmac]

---

@Sweetbay magnolia wrote:

 FYI - Under the box with the poster's info, there is a "message #" and "# of views" tally for every response.

I never knew that, thank you

---

[dooBdoo]

---

@Sweetbay magnolia wrote:

 FYI - Under the box with the poster's info, there is a "message #" and "# of views" tally for every response.

---

            This is a great point, @Sweetbay magnolia.   Having no hearts on a post doesn’t mean it wasn’t read or appreciated.  

            As a bit of trivia, though, the tally represents the number of times viewed in general and not the number of individual people who viewed the response.  

            For example, if I read the same post 3 times the view count will increase by 3.   It’s easy to test by re-opening the same thread repeatedly (or refreshing the page while in the thread) and watching the count go up each time.

[libbyannE]

Well, that’s a different way if looking at posts. I don’t look to see if my post was hearted or not. Usually, I look at the original post, and if I feel like commenting, I view my comment as between me and that poster. I rarely read much else. I AM super-busy with sick, elderly relatives, yes, so that may be why I don’t  take time or energy to wade into all the posts or to go back and see if anyone liked or hated my post. I move on.

[september]

@Mindy D   Thank you for pointing this out.  We west coast posters, who work and get here later in the day, appreciate that you brought this up 

[Mindy D]

---

@libbyannE wrote:

Well, that’s a different way if looking at posts. I don’t look to see if my post was hearted or not. Usually, I look at the original post, and if I feel like commenting, I view my comment as between me and that poster. I rarely read much else. I AM super-busy with sick, elderly relatives, yes, so that may be why I don’t  take time or energy to wade into all the posts or to go back and see if anyone liked or hated my post. I move on.

---

The amount of hearts is really not my point. My point is that since there are no hearts, or that there are less hearts towards the ends of threads it seems as though readers are skipping them. Some of the last posts have been very interesting. I’m glad I read them.

[Lindsays Grandma]

---

@AuntG wrote:

I'll sometimes give a heart to a post at the end because I want those who are late to the party to know someone read their thoughts.

---

@AuntG...Me too.  I honestly feel bad for those who aren't recognized as having taken the time to post on a thread.  

I  feel that the person who started the thread should acknowledge each poster with a heart, I do, even if I don't necessarily agree with what was said.  Of course I won't heart it if it is rude, nasty or insulting, one has to draw the line someplace.