Psst... We're working on the next generation of Chowhound! View >
HOME > Chowhound > Site Talk >
Jul 1, 2010 05:58 PM

Happy Posters vs. 'Debbie Downer' Posters..which are you?

I'd like to think that I'm overall a 'happy' poster with some 'downer' moments when negative things are said about my beloved restaurant or things I recommend and then I become snarky and then regret my comments if I don't edit in about you?

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
  1. Yep, me too. I try to be smart about what I say but sometimes I go all Angry Toad. To my regret, mostly.

    1 Reply
    1. re: EWSflash

      'but sometimes I go all Angry Toad.'

    2. i try to keep it positive, but i can certainly get pissy if someone insults or bashes me or my *opinion* (or that of a respected fellow Hound). there are some Debbie Downers around here who just really know how to bring out my inner snark on occasion! i also sometimes post in a hurry just to give someone quick info - like a basic search result with no additional comment - and i've been called out as being bitchy or brusque for it, but that's never my intention...if i'm giving you attitude, i'll be sure you know it :)

      19 Replies
      1. re: goodhealthgourmet

        That'd be funny if it wasn't so sad- like you're going to help out by giving somebody some info, but at the same time you're being brusque about it!

        1. re: EWSflash

          it's happened more than you might think. i once posted a reply to a first-time poster, offering search results and a suggestion about searching the board for popular topics before starting a thread because the answers might already be there...and i got a personal e-mail from someone telling me she didn't like my "tone." she thought i was giving attitude, and that my approach was a turnoff to new CHers and would discourage them from future posts...and then took it upon herself to "enlighten" me with several [erroneous] assumptions/presumptions she had made about me and my life. it was totally bizarre.

          1. re: goodhealthgourmet

            I think it is perfectly fine to just post a link when the OP has been on CH for a while and should have searched the site first. The "look it up, you lazy dope" is possibly inferred and if so, fine. Similar message to the LMGTFY site, You have been very courteous in showing new posters the ropes they haven't bothered to look into on their own. I agree with you that having newest first as the default search option is counterproductive and annoying.

            1. re: greygarious

              When it's new or even newer posters ask somewhat obvious questions it doesn't bother me much, if at all. It's the long time hounds who do this that make the hair on the back of my neck stand up and I find a low, guttural growl forming in the back of my throat... ;-D>

              1. re: Servorg

                Just something to consider that will maybe unruffle your feathers. Search really isn't that good on this site. Depsite suggestions to use Google, that isn't much better. So,yeah, as a long time poster somethines I will ask the obvious without searching due to frustration or laziness. Usually I'll indicate that at the top of the query.

                I've also said this a million times.If you don't frequent a board, search isn't as easy as one might think. What might be obvious to the regulars on a board, isn't even to a long-time Chowhound who doesn't follow that board.

                So on my home board, I'll give some slack, to the trillionth "Where to eat in Wine Country or SF post"

                At best, with the current search situation, I'll scroll through a few pages to see if something was posted in the last week. Then I make the decision to either post and risk the scorn of "we just talked about this, here's the link" ... or more likely, just not bother posting at all.

                1. re: rworange

                  I mostly consider myself a "positive" poster (I find it hard to slag off a place that is obviously trying hard but just not making the grade, for example) but there is one scenario where I turn into a downer: when someone posts their proposed itinerary and it is full of places that don't seem at all Chowish. This site is supposed to be about where to find the good stuff, after all. But I try not to be too judgemental as there are probably reasons for the choices. Doesn't stop me trying to talk them out of mediocre places, though :-).

                  1. re: grayelf

                    Guide books like Zagat. That's why you get all those lists that are mediocre joints. I'm in Guatemala now with little to go on but tourist sites and my hit ratio of good restaurants is 1 in 10.

                    The place that pissed me off the most tho was this little joint that got raves all over the web. A local tv station did a video. Presidents (of Guatemala) and celebrities made it a point to go there. It has been in business over 60 years.

                    It sucked.

                    That wasn't just my tastes. A Guatemalan friend tried to talk me out of it, but I was SOOOO sure it would be great based on the hype.

                  2. re: rworange

                    Yeah, that's why I don't find it rude to just post links to other posts that are relevant or specific searches that will help them -- the search sucks, and often regular posters will know that there has been a post right on that topic before. Then I'll usually just post a few links, and I don't see that as rude, just as helpful.

                    1. re: rworange

                      Agreed. The other thing is that restaurants close so often, or change hands, or change chefs, so that what we said a year ago or even a few months or weeks ago may be irrelevant today. The only thing that bothers me is if someone asks a question that is answered right there on the current page.

                      I'd say I'm a happy poster overall, but there are a few persistent attitudes that get me going sometimes. I remember recently the phrase 'feminist man-bashing' lighting a fire under me ...

                2. re: goodhealthgourmet

                  Oh for heaven's sake, GHG- that was uncalled for. Sometimes people go into a place with their dukes up, and this being online you can't see any sneers or dukes up. In the early days, I shudder to think of the things I said in online forums. Learned the hard way, but now I'm a LITTLE bit more sensitive to those things, at least I hope so, and sometimes I try to moderate people with an obvious case of the ass on either side when I see it. And sometimes not.

              2. re: goodhealthgourmet

                I agree there's no problem posting links to similar posts (in fact I think it's very helpful), it's when others "pile on" to agree that the current topic is "trite" or something to that effect. I mean, why bother? If you don't like the topic, why waste everyone's time stating it? It adds nothing to anyone's experience.

                1. re: mjhals

                  When it's a newish poster - or even someone new to a particular board - I like to write something like "Here are some posts to get you started," and then link to a search or some particular threads.

                  1. re: mjhals

                    I saw that comment as well. My feeling is not only does the search net a fair amount of frustration (but using google and adding 'chowhound' to the end of the query is amazingly helpful), but resurrecting old threads has its drawbacks.

                    If there are too many posts, the thread becomes unwieldy, and it may not even draw on recent experiences of longtime posters, much less new ones. And if there are newer voices one trusts on Chow, those voices may be totally absent from older threads.

                    If a topic resurfaces, why bother to add a disparagement when a new perspective might surface? (Not that I think posters like GHG are doing so; it is helpful to have the search-engine-savvy do the heavy-lifting).

                    1. re: onceadaylily

                      i know this is an older thread...

                      but google will separate searches by website for u now..then u can pull up all the results from the one website also....
                      in case anyone hadnt noticed that...

                      1. re: srsone


                        And, yes, I have noticed that. It's very helpful to click the 'more discussion/search results from' link that narrows the focus to a particular website.

                    2. re: mjhals

                      I agree! Isn't one person pointing them to the previous threads enough? That's considered useful, but the piling on adds absolutely nothing.

                    3. re: goodhealthgourmet

                      Of the many posts of yours that I've read, I've never found you to be anything other than pleasant & most helpful. I love your posts!

                      People forget that so much can be lost in translation of the posts. Interpret on the side of nice, folks.

                      However, I fully admit to being snarky on occasion. Not too often, but on occasion. I'm doing much better these days though... I don't need the drama. ;-)

                      1. re: lynnlato

                        aww, thanks sweetie. you know, i understand why some people might not think a short, to-the-point response is warm, fuzzy & welcoming, but it sucked to have someone accuse me of being mean when i was trying to help. and i fully admit that i can be a bit cranky or defensive on occasion, but it's usually in response to someone attacking me.

                        BTW, welcome back to the boards - i realized a couple of months ago that you'd been awfully quiet ;)

                        1. re: goodhealthgourmet

                          Thanks chica. Quite honestly, nothing was inspiring me to post. I was still reading and poking around, but had nothing to say. Which would generate a laugh from those who know me personally! LOL :-)

                    4. Ah, you and I both became well-acquainted with that snarky, should-I-have-hit-send feeling today, BC. I'd like to think I'm a fairly happy poster that aims for as much neutrality as possible. I'm not that much different in person than I am online... I don't see the point in using the anonymity of the interweb to be an arrogant ass. I do like that Chow moderates heavily. I've seen a lot of forums go waaaaay out of control due to a few mean people.

                      1. I'm nice. Unless I'm tired. Then I'm not allowed to type.

                        3 Replies
                        1. re: runwestierun

                          I'm nice too. Unless I'm drunk. Then I'm not allowed to type.

                            1. re: lynnlato

                              +2- but sometimes I chew through the ropes and type anyway.

                        2. I think (hell, I KNOW!) that NAF is a black hole that sucks alot of us into its maw. Especially when people use it in place of their therapist. Sometimes I want to scream "Don't you have any friends to talk this over with?" My opinion is that some people expect far more from CH than a food site was ever intended to fulfill. My New Year's resolution was to not post on it. I failed. And, to answer your question,yes, I can become DD or some derivative thereof. Mea maxima culpa.

                          2 Replies
                          1. re: c oliver

                            Sorry to take up space with +1 but yes, +1.

                            1. re: c oliver

                              For me, it depends on the day, but the therapeutic posts that are thinly veiled as food-related do hit on that for me.