Some people respond to discussions without actually reading them

@lovebuglena (42913)
Staten Island, New York
July 6, 2018 11:52am CST
By the responses we get to our discussions, enough times it is evident whether people that responded actually read the discussions or not. Sometimes it is evident based on their generic responses but it is also especially evident in those discussions whose title is a question. Some people simply answer the question in the title and move on to other discussions. A good test to see whether people actually read what you write is to have a title in the question and maybe even one that has nothing to do with the body of the discussion. Sure that can be thought of as being misleading but at least in this way you can find out who your real readers are as opposed to those that just answer the question in the title or write a generic response for their own gain and move on to other things.
15 people like this
15 responses
@jaboUK (64363)
• United Kingdom
6 Jul 18
This sort of thing happens too often. I wrote a poem on another site entitled 'Flowers in her Hair', and someone wrote 'Fun poem' - it was about flowers in a corpse's hair in her coffin.
3 people like this
@jaboUK (64363)
• United Kingdom
9 Jul 18
@lovebuglena Trust me, it wasn't fun - it was about my mother lying in her coffin. Here's the first verse: You lie there in your coffin with flowers in your hair, I hope you would have liked them 'twas me that put them there.
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
9 Jul 18
@jaboUK wonder why that person thought this was fun. Maybe because it had a nice flow to it?
1 person likes this
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
9 Jul 18
I don't see how that could have been thought of as a fun poem, however, I have not seen it to really say if that's true.
1 person likes this
@kavinitu (5535)
• India
9 Jul 18
Some people are responding without reading the discussion. You can easily understand that people have responded without reading the discussion.
2 people like this
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
9 Jul 18
I don't like when people do that. How can one have a genuine interaction with another person when one hasn't read the discussion?
1 person likes this
@avi256 (8489)
• Pune, India
15 Jul 18
Yes if people are trying to respond to multiple threads and want to comment at maximum topics this does happen.
1 person likes this
@kavinitu (5535)
• India
10 Jul 18
@lovebuglena Sometimes people just ready the comments and try to figure out in short what the discussion was about.
@AKRao24 (27427)
• India
6 Jul 18
Yes, I agree with you and in fact i have initiated similar discussions few months back and had a good argument there! We have all types of people here, some red entire discussion, some read the discussion fast, some just read the title and some just read the end to respond!
@AKRao24 (27427)
• India
6 Jul 18
@lovebuglena , That is true, but then you may miss some important points by doing so!
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
6 Jul 18
I have not thought of some things you mention here... like skimming through a discussion or just reading the end. I can see some doing exactly that. It's not good though. At least not just reading the end. At least with skimming you can get the gist of the discussion.
1 person likes this
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
9 Jul 18
@AKRao24 Skimming is better than not reading at all. Or just reading the last sentence.
1 person likes this
@Porcospino (31367)
• Denmark
6 Jul 18
I remember an old discussion that I started. The topic was a medical examination, and someone responded with a description of a school examination she had. I think that she only read the title. If you read the entire discussion it was pretty obvious what I was talking about. I think that a misleading title can be very revealing. If you use a title that can be interpreted in more than one way (like some members have deliberately done in the past) it is easy to spot the members who only read the title, and the result is very funny sometimes.
1 person likes this
@Porcospino (31367)
• Denmark
6 Jul 18
@lovebuglena It is my impression that some people just want to write a quick response and move on to the next discussion. If they don't read the discussion it is easy to misunderstand the topic.
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
9 Jul 18
@Porcospino Of course those that wanna bang out a specific amount of responses/comments may do just that, so they can reach their goal.
1 person likes this
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
6 Jul 18
I agree with you. Having a discussion whose title has various interpretations can let us know if people bothered to read it or not once we see their response.
1 person likes this
@MALUSE (69428)
• Germany
6 Jul 18
I have a wonderful example for what you've described here! I wrote a post on it some time ago.
@MALUSE (69428)
• Germany
6 Jul 18
@lovebuglena The internet is full of weirdos.
1 person likes this
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
6 Jul 18
Yes. I remember reading this one. The first response I see is actually mine. Who replies with a thumbs up when it has to do with someone no longer being alive?
@Sojourn (13832)
• India
6 Jul 18
@lovebuglena I can't believe someone can or actually did this...... Oh boy how embarrassing could it be
@Shivram59 (31262)
• India
7 Jul 18
@lovebuglena I visit and understand as many posts as is possible in the short time I have.When I feel I have something to say about a particular post ,I respond to it .
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
8 Jul 18
I agree with you on the point of "When I feel I have something to say about a particular post, I respond to it". I do that as well. There are people though, that have nothing to say about a post, except something generic, but respond anyway.
1 person likes this
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
9 Jul 18
@Shivram59 You can still respond to a post about which you are not familiar with topic-wise by asking questions related to that, so you can find out more... That's okay to do I think because, in this case, you are not replying just for the sake of replying.
1 person likes this
@Shivram59 (31262)
• India
8 Jul 18
@lovebuglena Thanks.How can I respond to a post about which I know I know nothing? Better move to some other post and respond to it .Thanks again,my friend.
@AmbiePam (84651)
• United States
6 Jul 18
I have seen people do that: write a misleading title to see if people will actually read the discussion. It's frustrating when you get a response that shows people really aren't reading what you so carefully wrote.
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
6 Jul 18
I know. And I hate those generic responses that are way over used. I rather not get anything than get those.
1 person likes this
@boiboing (13153)
• Northampton, England
6 Jul 18
Reading isn't always the same as understanding.
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
9 Jul 18
That is true. But you can't understand something, or try to, if you don't read it first.
@responsiveme (22932)
• India
7 Jul 18
That's true, but like the generic responses there seem to be generic answers to them to. I suppose I could put in a totally unconnected Title and Discussion as an experiment.
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
9 Jul 18
That's what I was thinking of doing once just out of curiosity and see what the results would be. I've seen discussions where the author thanks each person for responding... There is no reason to do that and it can become annoying actually if that's all that is being said by the author in the comments.
1 person likes this
@Icydoll (36725)
• India
6 Jul 18
Some people are responding after seeing the comments and responses in the discussions.
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
6 Jul 18
You mean they don't read the discussion itself but respond based on what others have said about it in the comments?
@Icydoll (36725)
• India
6 Jul 18
1 person likes this
@dya80dya (33082)
6 Jul 18
I read your entire discussion.
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
9 Jul 18
What did you think?
@mlgen1037 (29901)
• Manila, Philippines
6 Jul 18
Hello Lena. Yes, there are members here who are. Responding and commenting just for the sake of it.
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
6 Jul 18
It may not be just for the sake of it. It could be for the reason of "if I respond with anything, they will respond back and I will earn" type of thing.
@Jessabuma (31706)
• Baguio, Philippines
9 Jul 18
Yes that's right. I sometimes respond after reading the title without reading the whole contents of the discussions.
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
9 Jul 18
Any particular reason for that?
1 person likes this
@Jessabuma (31706)
• Baguio, Philippines
10 Jul 18
@lovebuglena when the post is too long for me and when I feel lazy but most of the time, I read all the content of the discussions
1 person likes this
@Deajae72 (723)
• United States
7 Jul 18
I like to read. I also read the comments. That is my way of teaching myself how to analyze someone's point of view. You are correct. I lost interest on a discussion if the poster responds to a comment with a "Thank You." I say "Thank You" if I do not have anything to say to a comment, like conversation is over already? I am sorry, but that is what I feel.
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
9 Jul 18
I like it when a discussion (mine or someone else's) gets a response and then in that response there is back to back commenting. But I don't like it when the back to back commenting isn't really a discussion but more of back and forth of short (maybe generic) phrases kinda thing that don't really anything to the conversation.
@Starmaiden (9311)
• Canada
6 Jul 18
It's true that some don't read the entire discussion. I've read many titles that ask a particular question and then read the discussion itself that doesnt even pose the title question. I am tempted many times to just answer the title question because that is what I would do in a face to face conversation. When people comment on a discussion they do not gain from it unless their comment gets a comment or an honorary mention or like.
@lovebuglena (42913)
• Staten Island, New York
6 Jul 18
Nothing wrong with answer the question in the title. I do that as well at times. But then a person should also say something about the discussion itself. In the same scenario, a title may not be in the form of a question but a person can read the title and come up with a response relevant to that, without reading the discussion itself, but it may not necessarily be what the discussion is actually about.
1 person likes this