RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying?

RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

[Poll]

Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying?

No, I read each post as if it was the person's first.

6% (3)

Maybe, if I remember the person, it might matter.

32% (16)

If I remember the person, of course it matters.

52% (26)

Oh hell, if I don't remember the person, I do a search of past posts!

4% (2)

None of it matters at all. I am only here for entertainment.

6% (3)

Total Votes : 50

(last vote on : 10/8/2012 5:15:58 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/11/2012 4:55:39 PM)
I had a poster when I was (I'm guessing).....11 or so maybe: "Keep on Trucking". Black light (for those that remember).... I didn't know (then) the posters history...and frankly....back then, I don't recall there even being a very good way to reply.

MissImmortalPain -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/11/2012 5:00:42 PM)
Snort (yes, you actually made me snort laughing) I really want to try that now but if it works I have a feeling it would end up having a lot of liquor, blood, or the law envolved. Maybe all three.

Endivius -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/11/2012 5:01:37 PM)
You gaize are all just lines of text with different avatars to me until we meet in RL. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you are all just different personalities of Ron's. [:D]

kitkat105 -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/11/2012 7:08:16 PM)
Sometimes. It depends on how my batshitcrazy radar reacts to some posters, i.e you can't possibly forget them.

dcnovice -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/11/2012 8:43:54 PM)
quote: am not at all sure what you mean by co-heart so I will not respond to it. I've never heard of a co-heart. Perhaps it's what Siamese twins have? [:)]

dcnovice -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/11/2012 8:45:36 PM)
FR A key use for a poster's history for me is as a tool for determining whether s/he is a troll better ignored than engaged.,

littlewonder -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/11/2012 8:53:22 PM)
I was just thinking, unless it's someone who posts a lot and every single day or almost every single day, then I'll remember who they are and the way they post may or may not color my responses to them. But if it's someone who doesn't post often or is new, the likelihood that I'll even remember them by tomorrow is extremely small. As for even remembering posts from anyone...usually once I shut off my computer, I've already forgotten what they wrote or even what I've written. It's just not important enough for me to clog my brain with.

NuevaVida -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/11/2012 9:52:28 PM)
Sure, if I remember the person, their posting history is considered. It will determine if I decide to read the post, and in what light I'd read it. There are some posters I skim over or don't read at all, and others that I read with interest. Based on the posting history. The only times I've looked up past posts has been when something stood out that seemed really inconsistent with something they said in the past, according to what I remembered.

LaTigresse -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/12/2012 9:08:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Karmastic quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse I am not at all sure what you mean by co-heart so I will not respond to it. I've never heard of a co-heart. co-heart means two things that go together, used in the blood industry and i'm sure other scientific endeavors. as an example of your OP in considering how someone has behaved previously, you often join in out of the blue (weren't part of convo) to agree with someone who just happens to be disagreeing with me; and never the opposite, not once. i know we must agree on many things, since i've chimed in multiple times to agree with you, just in the last few weeks. i keep telling myself you're a bigger person than that, but wait for the evidence. so me calling you their co-heart was a neutral way of describing you joining in to agree with someone who's disagreeing with me. this is all fine, sometimes even welcomed, but ultimately, a bit tiring. quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse It is obvious you see things a great deal differently than many of us do. this is more of what i mean. so now it's a "great deal differently", and "many of us". well, i must be some fucked up freak misfit and a terrible person. woe is me ;) bwa hahahaha, you're fun. EDIT: lol, just noticed, the first thing i did was to compliment LaTig on this being a great top post. so, by her logic, she must also see things a great deal differently than many of us do. bwa hahaha, i love when they try and use the royal "we". pss - notice, LaTig gave up on the i'm "instructing others how to post" schtick. Perhaps english is not your first language as the first bit of this makes no sense but it's sort of an 'okay, whatever...'. As for my royal We, attemping to instruct others on how to post..........that would be as futile as attempting to nail jello to a sapling tree. I don't post on here with the intent to instruct anyone. I give my opinion on things, I may even give advice........I am also life experienced enough to know that people are going to do what they are going to do. Not much I write on here, in response to their dumbassery, is going to make fucking bit of difference. It's human nature.

DesFIP -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/13/2012 7:18:24 AM)
You never get a second chance to make a first impression. Online or real life, if you've done or said something so objectionable that I don't forget it, then of course it will color how I see you and respond to you, assuming it doesn't get you blocked and ignored.

RemoteUser -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/13/2012 7:23:32 AM)
Each to their own, but I have no trouble separating one post from another. People can change in the course of a sentence: We need you to sign the form to pull the plug. Will you marry me? Congratulations, it's a girl. You get the idea. I could judge people on their past, sure, but people are not solely defined by their past, otherwise we would be stuck in static. If you think of the post and not the writer, you build on ideas instead of people. Which would you prefer?? I would rather build on ideas that can be shared, and let the individuals build themselves. Their foibles are not my concern.

BeautyDebased -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/13/2012 7:27:49 AM)
it depends, sometimes i do if it was something small because everyone makes mistakes and no-one is perfect but if it was something huge, aka, trying to steal my Master then no....i'm highly possessive, and while i love inflicting pain on girls with Him or having Him hurt both of us if they try to come between us or hang around Him sexually, even though He always tells them straight up that if it happens again their out...not like He can't stick up for Himself lol, i can't help but feel their not really interested in play with me which is really the purpose, that and friendship, another one would be being overly rude for no reason...again, something bad, not sure what other examples but little mistakes, well, everyone has their moments and i'm not going to hate someone just because they mess up a little, sometimes the first impression isn't always the right one either, there have been a few times i thought i really didn't like someone but after getting to know them better i found out that wasn't the case at all, some people are reserved, defensive and have been hurt so they take a bit to open up...i think that's what the OP meant? it's late here, that's my excuse.

BeautyDebased -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/13/2012 7:35:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SoulAlloy If I'm used to a posters style (sarcastic, mischieveous, serious, heartfelt, etc.) then it can affect my interpretation of the post. Occasionally I'll need to reread a post just to try and relate it to the topic at hand, I'm kind of anal like that though I usually try and take it as face value (or should that be written value?), sometimes simply the mood I'm in can affect my interpretation too, regardless of the poster's history That makes sense, might have helped if i'd read the OP, i have had arguments with people on the forums then a month later been fine with them, for me i can get a little emotional when it's a subject that i feel strongly about and i know my own downfalls, i know i should understand others are different and for the most part i do but i still mess up sometimes. i admit i get hurt easily, and another downfall of mine is to act in a defensive manner rather than try to discuss why something was said to me, it's a lot to do with my past, i think anyway, the usual school issues, i've never really had a close group of girlfriends and i'm very shy so i find it hard to make friends, so i guess a part of me just wants to fit in and know people like to have me around, so when i feel i'm being rejected (even if i'm not really) i get upset instead, i'm aware some likely may not like me on the forums even now but you know, i can't change the past and figure i will just move on, try to do better and ignore unwarranted comments, it's all i can do i think.

fucktoyprincess -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/13/2012 10:31:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RemoteUser Each to their own, but I have no trouble separating one post from another. People can change in the course of a sentence: We need you to sign the form to pull the plug. Will you marry me? Congratulations, it's a girl. You get the idea. I could judge people on their past, sure, but people are not solely defined by their past, otherwise we would be stuck in static. If you think of the post and not the writer, you build on ideas instead of people. Which would you prefer?? I would rather build on ideas that can be shared, and let the individuals build themselves. Their foibles are not my concern. I am certainly one who is here more for the ideas. But obviously, as is clear from this thread, some have a different approach. I focus much more on what people are saying, and not who they are. And if they've said or done things in the past that I disagree with, I don't really care when I evaluate something new that they've written. Again, I said it before and I'll say it again, a good post is a good post and a bad post is a bad post regardless of who it comes from. And just because I like someone doesn't mean their posts are always correct. The dialogue here is always better when people can focus more on what is said. [sm=2cents.gif]

Deliena -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/13/2012 10:52:43 AM)
Well I've been on CM since 2007 and posted for a while, got jaded, had too much work to do, kind of forgot the site for a while and came back. Some of the people around I know from before and recognise their names, the way they post and therefore have a sort of 'feel' for them, others are newer and I don't have a feel for them yet and some people I just plain disagree with. That's life. I tend to use past posts as an indicator of where someone's coming from, but in doing so recognise that over time we all develop and change according to what's happening to us, what experiences we are going through etc. etc. Some of my older posts are probably mortifying, I've probably always had the same sense of humour though. Shrug. When I came to this site first I only knew then what I knew about BDSM and myself, today I know what I know now. Therefore I'm a big fat maybe on this topic

BitaTruble -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/13/2012 11:37:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RemoteUser Each to their own, but I have no trouble separating one post from another. People can change in the course of a sentence: We need you to sign the form to pull the plug. Will you marry me? Congratulations, it's a girl. You get the idea. I could judge people on their past, sure, but people are not solely defined by their past, otherwise we would be stuck in static. If you think of the post and not the writer, you build on ideas instead of people. Which would you prefer?? I would rather build on ideas that can be shared, and let the individuals build themselves. Their foibles are not my concern. I didn't get it. Just saying. If someone writes a post with a gross generalization and I point out it is a generalization and not a universal truth then get back, "You're just a dumb cunt," (has absolutely happened here.. twice as I recall - from two (allegedly) different trolls. I am not going to be prone to interact with them again especially if I see their 'habit' is to call everyone who disagrees with them a dumb cunt just because they are a woman or disagree with some remark they flip out of their fingertips. If they come back a few months later, I'm not going to be forgetting their prior history and allow them a fresh opportunity for verbal assault. I'm open-minded but not so open-minded that my brains fall out. I think mature adults realize there are consequences for their actions and that you can't 'fix' everything you've taken the pains to break. There are some amazing people here.. they get my attention, their words get read because they have proven they are worth my time to read them. I'm not into trolls and I'm not a great fan of drama llamas. I have not found many instances where indulging either one of those has impacted me in any sort of profound manner. So, one or two chances is more than enough before I move on and find someone who I consider quality to spend my online time reading. Trolls, creepers and the like don't fall into that category. Often I will make initial attempts to clarify things.. I'm not perfect either so it's possible I may misconstrue things but my gut is pretty spot on and I see patterns quite well. To ignore shit-storms in the making is to ignore my gut instincts and my personal experience leads me to believe that ignoring my gut is rarely good for me. No pass from me. I use the block and then the troll, drama llama or creeper disappear from my radar. I have better things to do with my time.

LadyHibiscus -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/13/2012 11:42:06 AM)
I have a long long memory. If someone goes away and comes back under another name all shiny... I remember. And I think about what they did before.

Karmastic -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/13/2012 11:48:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess quote: ORIGINAL: RemoteUser Each to their own, but I have no trouble separating one post from another. People can change in the course of a sentence: We need you to sign the form to pull the plug. Will you marry me? Congratulations, it's a girl. You get the idea. I could judge people on their past, sure, but people are not solely defined by their past, otherwise we would be stuck in static. If you think of the post and not the writer, you build on ideas instead of people. Which would you prefer?? I would rather build on ideas that can be shared, and let the individuals build themselves. Their foibles are not my concern. I am certainly one who is here more for the ideas. But obviously, as is clear from this thread, some have a different approach. I focus much more on what people are saying, and not who they are. And if they've said or done things in the past that I disagree with, I don't really care when I evaluate something new that they've written. Again, I said it before and I'll say it again, a good post is a good post and a bad post is a bad post regardless of who it comes from. And just because I like someone doesn't mean their posts are always correct. The dialogue here is always better when people can focus more on what is said. [sm=2cents.gif] well said, and expanded on well! that's the spirit of what i meant.

OsideGirl -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/13/2012 12:00:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus I have a long long memory. If someone goes away and comes back under another name all shiny... I remember. And I think about what they did before. <gasp!> I'm sure that's NEVER happened.......[;)] quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble I think mature adults realize there are consequences for their actions and that you can't 'fix' everything you've taken the pains to break. I'm much more apt to be forgiving of someone that owns up to their shit. Simply admitting that you've made an error as opposed to expecting everyone to forget that you've behaved like an ass, then getting pissed off when everyone won't forget.

LadyHibiscus -> RE: Do you consider a poster's history when reading/replying? (6/13/2012 12:02:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus I have a long long memory. If someone goes away and comes back under another name all shiny... I remember. And I think about what they did before. <gasp!> I'm sure that's NEVER happened.......[;)] Oh, never!! Well, hardly ever! [;)]

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Spam Policy

0.0625