Adding your 2 cents without first counting the tips in the jar, so to speak
Personally, I consider it disrespectful to your fellow Hounds to start a new thread on a non-time-sensitive subject without first searching for a previous one on that subject and adding your thoughts to IT instead.
Likewise, to add a post to a thread without first reading the previous comments. If I agree with one or more of these and have nothing new or different to add, I click the recommend button on those that say what I would have, rather than posting a separate "+1". It appears to me that the number of those has decreased since Hounds have begun noticing and using the recommend feature.
On the other hand, some threads get very long, to the point where reading all the comments before posting becomes overly burdensome. Do you have your own "cut-off" number, and if so, what is it? I seem to read 50-100, depending on how many long vs. brief posts there are, then skimming the rest, before weighing in if my viewpoint/suggestion is not already included.
Just the other day, the 15th on a thread of brief posts repeated all the answers from the first 14. Does Poster 15 not bother to read the thread, or is s/he a digital Narcissus, someone who loves the sound of their own typing? Ooh, a new neologism: internarcissus. I've got a little (mental) list, of Chowholes, and it's got a new member.
End of rant.
Cutoff for me reading a post around 8 days.I might reply 2 x on subject.I'll wait for it to die and come back.How many more times can you reply to, or read ------------ Forget about it.
Sure, I think we've all read these types of threads AND been guilty of repeating comments already made. We may not realize we're doing it. Or, we may not realize how that 15th post comes across. Does the Recommend feature cut down on some of those types of CH comment behaviors? I think so. I also think the boards are designed to encourage group speak, group think and piling on of shared ideas. Being heard/read is one fundamental reason why forums work.
Is it disrespectful? I don't think the majority of people posting are being anything more than helpful and excited to contribute THEIR voice to a thread.
And FWIW, your references to Chowholes, mental list and new member offend me more. Why? Because you're focusing on forum behavior you can't control rather than any value actually offered in a thread to make your point.
Happens all the time on threads, one person does something off and that somehow ruins an entire thread of replies? Not for my CH reading dollar it doesn't. I think that type of attention disrespects the rest of the people trying to contribute. Why hand over the value of a thread to one person who doesn't care?
I don't count the tips in the jar usually I value the service.
"Chowhole" - like it. I'll never use it, but I like it.
scenario(s) "I'm going to be in your town tonight in 20 minutes - need killer suggestions!" and on a slow-moving board.
or "I found a great deal on tomatoes - whatta I do?"
or (worse) being chastised by someone who DIDN'T read the OP's query, when one is in fact replying precisely to the post.
life's too short to care. just ignore it. "reply" is voluntary.
re: hill food
Huh? Scenario 3 I get, but I am mystified as to why 1 and 2 would bug you.
Scenario 1 just seems like a post by an optimist, and why not? I think I have been guilty of that kind of post. I travel a lot, take a lot of road trips and sometimes find myself in need of a place to eat. These days mostly I use yelp but chowhounders are usually more discerning, so sometimes I'm just praying that, serendipitously, someone will be on the slow-moving board and see my post.
Scenario 2 doesn't bother me either. Sure, there have probably been countless threads on what to do with tomatoes, but food, like most other things, has it's fads and innovations, and a tomato thread from last summer will not have the same responders, recipes, etc as one from this summer. So, unless there has just been a seriously long thread on tomatoes in the past week or so, I don't see the problem.
It's funny, I don't really find myself irritated by much of anything on chowhound, except bad restaurant and recipe advice. and even then, I know that's subjective.
Re scenario 2 - I disagree. The new thread will have the same recommendations, if not completely then for the most part, as all its predecessors. Different responders, maybe, but the same content. If I see one more question about Zuni chicken......!!! Recipes are not time-sensitive the way restaurant recs are, what with chefs and businesses coming and going.
heh - search for ones on slow boards like Great Plains or Prairie Provinces like "HELP I land in your city in 20 minutes and I'm sure I'll starve!!!!!" or more seriously, the DC board for "kid-friendly lunch near the Mall" or SF for "best taqueria". sure things change, but not within a few weeks.
as for how a specific ingredient is used, little can be done that hasn't already except for technique. or found through a search of this site or others.
re: hill food
I actually like threads like scenario 2. It's not that the poster doesn't have (or can't find) ideas on his/her own. It's that she/he wants a discussion. If I find a great deal on tomatoes and ask my wife "what shall I do with all these tomatoes", I'd be disappointed if she pointed to the bookshelf... I'm expecting a bit of banter back-and-forth as we explore some possibilities.
Unless someone is looking for strictly factual information, I think it's disappointing when someone (sometimes myself, I admit) refers them to a previous thread. It's as though someone came to you wanting a discussion and you instead handed them a recording of a discussion you had with your other friends last year!
I don't like replying to a thread unless I've read all the previous replies, which results in my ignoring several massive threads that keep coming up. Like you, my personal cutoff number is around 50-100 previous replies. My reason for this tendency/preference is that I want to contribute something of VALUE to the conversation, and not just repeat another person. For that reason, I also quite like the recommend button.
I'm not sure if replying before reading through the replies should be considered intentionally disrespectful, but I have previously felt "ignored" when I responded early on to a very simple query and 30 posts down the line of similar replies, somebody else posts the exact same link and suddenly everyone thinks it's a great suggestion. It just seems like certain posters have more credibility, whether it's due to how long they've been on CH or something else. I'm just glad there is now a feature that allows us to unfollow posts that get tedious.
ohmy, if a thread is super long and the discussion runs for days, even weeks, I won't necessarily remember every comment that was made over time and those comments are now appearing as collapsed/read by me already. I might open them again if the entire thread is short but not likely if say 25 posts or longer. All of this to say, I may be guilty or may be reading examples of repeated value and not realize it.
I also think its human to want to say things your own way from time to time.
I also think your observation and some posters appearing more comfortable with each other than the general population is valid.
But tedium aside, I enjoy CH threads for the entire discussion not just bits and pieces.
Your comments for instance don't just provide value and a good deal of playfulness but they contribute to the entire discussion. So thank you.
Greyg, I'd love to hear your thoughts on CH's that use the Recommend button and rarely if ever write an actual comment. Is that some sort of report card, passive agreement to a poster or laziness? Or, or, or...
And does the new "un" button have the responsibility of turning your gaze away when everything in our being wants to respond?
The site now offers several ways to back out of any discussion "we" once elected to be a part of so what more can be done to address human behavior that would satisfy the need to be heard when discussions don't go our way?
I don't believe an answer exists beyond self control.