Can we have Threads with context please?

[Caliman73]

Many of the threads I have started in the past, have sunk like stones. This one will likely do so as well. I am just venting and I see that there are others who have shared my frustration.

I tend to be verbose in many of my threads and responses. I like to try to get my point across clearly. Maybe too wordy...who knows?

I am wondering, What causes people to post subject lines that are provocative or excited but then there is nothing explaining the context or any information about what is going on?

I will give a hypothetical example:

"Man, they have really done it now!!!" - Followed by no words in the body of the thread. No who "They" are and no "what" this "they" have done now.

Maybe just a couple of words to explain? "Man, they have really done it now!!!" - I was watching the view and they said that Trump really is the offspring of a human and orangutan. We can't have human orangutan hybrids running the US!

[jberryhill]

1. Not after what just happened!

Did you see that?

[Cirque du So-What]

4. This!

[Grasswire2]

48. that is the subject that frosts me.

THIS!

[JudyM]

94. ⬆️ THIS ⬆️

[Pluvious]

104. Click bait subject headers are rude

Thank you for posting this resonable request Grassy

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

5. OMG!

[Caliman73]

6. This is an earth shaker!!

...

[Cha]

64. lol.. Gracias for the OP, Caliman.. I don't have a

tv so it would so be helpful.. if they want more to join in.

[Amaryllis]

80. Bombshell!!!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

11. The man is insane! (sorry if that is news to the vanity posters who post "The man is insane!"). . nt

[Mister Ed]

21. BOOM!

[Amaryllis]

81. SNAP!

[Alacritous Crier]

28. My feet hurt.

[treestar]

61. Call Congress right fuckin' now!

[Amaryllis]

82. TURn on RAchel now!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. Thank you! I complain every time I see one of these,

but it seems to fall on deaf computers or whatever the metaphor should be. I wish there was a category for alerting on these posts.

[Amaryllis]

85. I also wish there was a category for alerting on these.

[LakeArenal]

3. Yes. Sometimes there just a couple words.

Sometimes links won’t come up.

It really is annoying.

[CrispyQ]

7. Blind links are also a big problem.

Post title: OMG! Can you believe this?

Post content: A link with zero explanation where it goes & what it's about.

It's rude. Or lazy. Or both.

[Amaryllis]

83. Inconsiderate. Inability to put oneself in another's shoes.

[Martin Eden]

99. I never click on those links

Thoughtless and lazy.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

8. Yes! Vanity threads drown information, analysis & discussion threads. . . . nt

[Soph0571]

13. Heh. You were the one that stopped me doing that!!!

Making sure title and context and I am forever thankful for it.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

14. You are kind to say so. I have enjoyed your threads many times. . . . nt

[Soph0571]

40. Thanks love n/t

[Amaryllis]

84. VAnity threads. Great way to describe them. ANd they do drown out threads with value and substance.

[msongs]

9. it's the twitterization of the internet. nt

[Caliman73]

19. It would be interesting to go back and check that.

That is a good point. I don't do twitter so I wouldn't really know. It would be neat if someone could do a quick look at threads before Twitter became super popular and see if they were more context laden.

I do however remember emails (from way back in the day) with FWD:FWD:FWD: that were pretty crap too.


I don't think we need to do full on paragraphs, but just a little bit of information as to what the point of the thread is.

[greyl]

96. It happened here before Twitter, mostly about MSNBC or CNN TV content.

"Keith just tore that guy a new one." end of post
"Don Lemon, lol." end of post

[lagomorph777]

23. Another useless-post category: blind links to Twit.

If I wanted to be on Twit, I'd have a Twit account. I am here because I am socially distant from Twit and Falsebook. Very, very distant.

[klook]

106. Link to Tweet

Link to Tweet

[lagomorph777]

110. AAAAAAaaaaaarrrrgh!

[Amaryllis]

86. MAny tweets do have substance, though.

[smirkymonkey]

10. Hear, hear!

It's very annoying! Or threads that assume everyone is watching television and the same exact program that they are.
"I can't believe Rachel said that!" n/t

[Caliman73]

22. Yes indeed. All it takes is a couple of words extra.

"I can't believe Rachel said that Trump is a blood sucking vampire. You should watch her show for 4/20/2020."

[Dr. Strange]

12. Mainly because half the people I was with believed it until I explained the situation to them.

[scarletwoman]

47. Woot!!!! It lives!!!!

[Dr. Strange]

59. Except, sadly, I don't have a link to the original thread!

I wonder if anyone else can find it?

[scarletwoman]

78. It's apparently not possible to access the pre-2012 archives anymore - at least I wasn't able to.

I found the link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6739759 - but it doesn't work.

I also found the probable date of the original thread - April 10, 2011 - on this page: https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/archives.php?date=2011x4x10

You have to scroll down a ways to find the thread title, "mainly because half the people I was with believed it until I explained the situation to them" - but clicking on it doesn't work, either.

Oh well - at least we have our memories.

[Mean Gene]

101. Could this be it?

https://web.archive.org/web/20080901160812/https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6739759

[klook]

107. OMG

That's hilarious! I don't know how I missed this thread when it happened!


Some of my favorite responses:

"Bunny. Pancake. Head. nt"
-- followed by "Baby. Mini-sandwich. Head." with this picture:


"Little boy, are you lost? Do you want me to go to the service desk and call your mommy on the loudspeaker?"

"In the end, the universe tends to unfold as it should."

and (by the OP author): "this thread sux"

[Dr. Strange]

108. YES!

Bless you. Bless your toes!

You are DU's greatest DUer this day!

[Amaryllis]

87. Believed what?

[Jamastiene]

109. CALL CONGRESS RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!!

The fun is over.
No more chicken threads.
Oscar.

I miss those old classics. I wish there was a way to make a collections of links on DU to all of them to re-read them all.

[Dr. Strange]

111. I know right?

I miss those old classics. I wish there was a way to make a collections of links on DU to all of them to re-read them all.

I'd love to read the kudzu thread, but apparently it went places, and no one can find it.

[Jamastiene]

112. I found one of them.

It asks for your old password info, but if you just click cancel, you can still read it:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x4465947

[demmiblue]

15. The problem is... a lot of them seem to get several responses.

[Caliman73]

24. True. Mostly people asking for context or criticizing.

This is a discussion board. We want to discuss, but we want to know what we are discussing.

[cwydro]

16. Dream on.

This has been going on forever.

I once asked an OP to give some more info about his post (very politely) and he pmed me calling me names. Kinda sad, because I always had liked him before.

[Caliman73]

26. I am not holding my breath that my thread will "once and for all" stop the situation.

Just needed to put it out there.

That is horrible that someone would lash out at being asked for more information.

I think that the anonymity of the internet sometimes brings out the worst in people.

I just want to talk, and discuss, and debate and be around people that seem sane.

[cwydro]

29. I hear you.

I was quite taken aback, but I learned long ago not to take anything personally that happens on the internet.

For what it’s worth, I appreciate your attempt at this!

[Caliman73]

38. You can join CAP!

We're still working on the name.

See posts 20 and 33 for context!

[Hekate]

17. Thank you. I come here for info and conversation, not Twitter.

I do a fair number of one-liners as responses to kick threads, but not as a no-content OP.

[Caliman73]

27. Agreed. Sometimes a response can be simple.

OPs don't need to stretch out for days, but a sense of what the discussion is would be nice.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

67. Is that a confession that you kick the toons when they're down?!?

I'd miss most toons if somebody didn't kick 'em when they're down. We're all ruined!

[crickets]

69. Agreed. OP starting a thread should contain a little more content -

- the name of the person who got the OP riled or an explanation of the issue, along with a link or a TV channel and full name of the program if applicable. I don't watch a lot of these shows, so when somebody yells, "Mabel is really giving it to him!" that turns me off right away. Mabel who? On what channel? Which "he" is she giving it to? Even better, what exactly did she say that is so exciting? I'm as bad as the next person for calling Chris Matthews Tweety, but I've tried to stop doing that or referring to people by initials because I want people to understand what I'm talking about.

That kind of thing.

I tend to restrict the one-liners for kicking as well.

[UTUSN]

18. K&R for solidarity re: "threads sunk like stones". But to add context (cough) here:

I have a spectrum for posts, with Erratic at one end over to Earnest at the other. The ones I spend effort, research, originality on are the ones that sink like stones. But oh if I momentarily dare to indulge being a tad misspoken, candid, whimsical, or just off-the-wall ------- the mob Flames, high handed judgments, and vulgar personal attacks will pile up with a couple of thousand Views, with those who do those things having exceedingly high self-esteem, empowerment, and conviction about being exemplars of kindness and .standards.

------------ Whups, left "solidarity" behind and got carried away!1

[Caliman73]

30. Controversy arouses I guess.

I know exactly what you are saying.

Sometimes people have seen a response and said, "That should be its own Thread". Head swollen from the compliment I research, add more context and pose what I think might be a conversation starting question....

ONE MAYBE TWO views and down the page it goes.

I don't kick my own threads so they disappear.

[NBachers]

20. I have a chronic obsession with calling out non-context non-info posts, and I'm none too friendly

about it.

Then I get something like, "I guess you're just not paying attention if you don't know!"

I'm special 'cause I know something you don't haahaa.

Thank you for being an involved part of the Context Alliance here.

[cwydro]

31. ...

[Caliman73]

33. We need a catchy name...

We are the Context Alliance Posters CAP!

[Amaryllis]

88. THose posts exclude people .....like high school where the in crowd won't let you in.

[Tom Kitten]

32. OMG I'm SERIES this is HUGH!!!1!

context does make a difference

[Caliman73]

35. OMG, THE Hugh Downs? From 20/20?

Ha!

[Tom Kitten]

39. Yesiree!

Hugh from 20/20 who is now 99 in 2020! I'm so old I remember him when he hosted Concentration

(don't mean to hijack thread but a little levity now and then don't hurt)

[nilram]

50. Ha! At least you used an accurate title!

[zackymilly]

34. If it wasn't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college.

[nilram]

52. lol!

[crickets]

70. +1

[MerryBlooms]

36. Maybe they ran out of monitor ink. n/t

[Andy823]

37. Seems to be a lot

of trolls still coming here trying to rack up posts. One poster averages 100 post a day, and will hit 3,000 before they have been here for a whole month, plus
had two posts removed!

Everyone should check posters profiles you can learn a lot from them. And remember "don't feed the trolls it only makes them worse!"

[SidDithers]

41. If you had posted this with just the Thread Title, and no content in the body...

then you would have won DU's prize for best post of the day.

Sid

[Caliman73]

42. Hindsight is 20/20

Next time...

[3Hotdogs]

43. Also, location of the story or photo would be nice.

[Patterson]

44. Most of it is stuff that went across their TV screen.

[NRaleighLiberal]

45. lots use DU like Twitter. frustrating. also an assumption we are

all watching teevee. I'm used to it after 16 years here

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

46. I have more than once complained about such threads.

Not everyone is watching the exact same thing. Context matters a lot.

[nilram]

49. This is a MUST READ!!!

Or, “Wow, I really should have posted this a long time ago.” Ooookkaaaaayyyy. Why don’t you tell me what it’s about? I rolled my eyes so hard I think I sprained them.

[Caliman73]

53. That is hillarious

"rolled my eyes so hard I think I sprained them".

Yes! just a couple of words to tell me what you are talking about please.


I have the same conversation with my kids. "Daddy, look at that..." "Ummm can I have a general direction or description of what I am supposed to be looking at?"

[Baclava]

51. Twitter heads! Like we are reading their minds and we should know what they are blurting out means

Oh dear, now I will get alerted on again, I just know it

[miyazaki]

54. This.

Ya, this. "This" is about the most annoying one word fucking crap title ever perpetrated here. I would ban the ones who post like this for a month and flush their thread down the toilet.

[Caliman73]

71. This, so much this!

Remember the ones with the arrow?

/
||
||
||
\___

[progree]

55. I don't click on threads that have these information-less topic-less subject lines

I used to when they made it to the 5 Greatest Threads section of the home page, but I don't anymore. I spend way too much time as it is trying to keep up with the news without wasting my time on these.

[Caliman73]

63. I agree, but sometimes the Thread title teases, so you click and .... nothing.

Like, "OMG, What Jim Acosta just said is the best thing I have heard today"

Then.... NOTHING.

I want to hear or see what was said.

[progree]

74. Yup, I've seen quite a few of those lately. Good example n/t.

[DTomlinson]

56. Agreed in full! Context is key!

[DENVERPOPS]

57. My pet peeve

is when people, Media Included, name a Representative or Senator with out putting a "D" or "R" following the person they name the area they Represent.

Like: Joe Blow D-CO and his position: Joe Blow D-CO U.S. Senator.......

[BadGimp]

58. NO

[betsuni]

60. Annoying.

It's like they think we're in the living room with them. Often someone will say "Ari is talking to so-and-so" and I want to see it but have to look up who Ari is, what show, when, etc.

Also annoying is when a tweet or quote is posted and instead of discussing what is said, most comments are about how everybody hates that person, or asking why we should care what that person says. Boring.

Also, I have an almost irresistible impulse leave the comment "But her emails" to almost everything.

[treestar]

62. Du tradition.

Part of its charm. Sometimes a DUer watching TV assumes the rest of DU is watching the same thing. Kind of cute, really, as if the other DUers are there with you in the room, sitting next to you on the couch.

[Caliman73]

65. That is a super positive way of looking at this....

Go Away!






Kidding.... I agree, sometimes people get caught up in the moment. It is still irritating when you are just looking for what all the excitement is about and ..... NOTHING!

[nilram]

73. Maybe we should have a "thread of the moment " forum

So those watching teevee can post away, nilly-willy. (And I could ignore the whole thing.)

[bluecollar2]

66. Kick and rec!..n/t

[Crunchy Frog]

68. Call Congress NOW!!!

[TheBlackAdder]

72. My next OP will just have the word, CONTEXT, nothing more! 😂

[ahoysrcsm]

75. Can you provide context? I don't see the threads your speaking of.

Just sounds like your singing into a fan to me.

[Caliman73]

90. Well played....

Seriously though, they are out there. I will not be naming names or posting links, as calling other DUers out by name is against the Terms of Services. I have never had a post removed and do not want to start now.

When you see a post with a urgent headline and then little to no information about who or what is the subject, those are the threads. Just take a look at the responses to this thread. Other people seem to understand what is being discussed.

[ahoysrcsm]

98. I know the posts you speak of, I just trash them. It's not worth the time anymore.

[ahoysrcsm]

76. Better yet, why don't you message the posters that are offending you.

Might be worth the time.

[Caliman73]

77. Might be worth the time, but likely not.

Typically, clarification is requested in those threads and there is a lack or response, or as others posted, they receive DMs with insults. some posters tend to get defensive when asked about the lack of clarity/context in a post.

People are having a discussion, venting, and having a good time on this thread it seems, so all in all, seems like it was worth it.

[Amaryllis]

89. NO, they don't respond. I've tried. Gave up. I think they really don't care if their posts mean

something or not. LIke they are just having an emotional outburst and then move on to the next one.

[Amaryllis]

79. I did a very similar post to yours about two weeks ago and it went to the top of the

greatest page very quickly with 294 recs.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213204623

ONe of the respondents said the kind of posts you are referring to are equivalent to spam. They clutter up the discussion forum and a lot of posts with valuable content get lost because people are posting so fast and so many posts of the kind you describe with no context and just emotional reactions.

You are far from alone. This has been a problem since I first started coming to DU a lot of years ago.

[Caliman73]

91. Yes it is a long standing issue.

I think because the news moves so fast and the idiot in the White House and his cronies and the GOP give us so much to be outraged about, there has been an uptick.

[Amaryllis]

93. Agree. Lots more outrage posts than usual and they tend to be reactions with no content or context.

[Karma13612]

92. Excellent point!

Last edited Sat Apr 18, 2020, 07:35 AM - Edit history (1)

Besides news sites, I pretty much live on DU and another equally progressive political site.

I have never started a thread as I don’t feel gifted enuf to compose something that is worthy.

Just recently I have noticed the uptick in meaningless OP’s. I always thought there were guidelines as to what constituted something worthy of being an OP.

On the other progressive site, I have seen many comments criticizing an OP when it was frivolous or repetitive. The poster is asked to take down the OP. Not sure what happens if they don’t.

Maybe we need to do that here?

Anyway, thanks for the OP. It really hits a nerve with me as well!

[Stuart G]

95. K and R..

[Buckeye_Democrat]

97. You're missing the stuff that's happening!

I’m so angry about that stuff!

[Caliman73]

105. I know, right?

I am especially troubled by that thing they said...

[ck4829]

100. K&R

[robbob]

102. Bump

[zonkers]

103. Thanks!

[rictofen]

113. A rec and a Monday night bump n/t