People commenting on the first page without having read the previous posts.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

This is the second time in a short time that I've seen someone comment on a thread on the first page without having read the previous comments. Does this happen a lot?

I think it's normal that if you comment on page 7 of a thread you're interested in, you should read at least the first page and the page you're going to comment on, or pages 1-2 and 6-7, because in general, when a thread gets longer nobody reads all the pages, especially if you're commenting for the first time.

This also happens in other forums, and it is something we have commented on in our local board. Here the payment for signature campaigns may have an influence, but I visit other forums and if I comment on a thread for the first time on page 23, there's no way I've read the previous 23 pages.

But not reading the first page, especially if the thread is only one page long is a cardinal sin.

I'm about to send a PM to the manager so he doesn't pay him for that post.

What do you think about this?

[Despairo]

I'd say it's a loophole.

His post is on topic because he gives his opinion to the @OP's post and it's constructive as long as his post has a weight, right? not to mention few campaign managers consider a long post without any point is constructive.

But we as a reader find it's not good since read someone post that repeating a same point that has been mentioned by other user or asking a question that has been answered by other user isn't make any sense.

Honestly I don't really care if it's a newbie or user without signature, but for someone who join a signature campaign, I guess there's need an action.

Does this happen a lot?

Yeah, it happens a lot especially in Altcoins board.

[bittraffic]

It is the race to be on the first page of the thread since it is often the only page that is being read. I'm not sure if the campaign participants today are being mandated to be on the first page of the thread but I'm not gonna be surprised and advertisers would like that.

I think OPs of a thread are to lock the thread whenever it reaches a certain number of pages and his question is answered already. If anyone does have anything else to say, he can create another thread for his issue.

[robelneo]

This is the second time in a short time that I've seen someone comment on a thread on the first page without having read the previous comments. Does this happen a lot?

It happens a lot but there's always a point in a discussion where a post goes astray to address one issue or to supplement the topic being discussed, like in a boxing match discussion between two fighters but the topic goes astray between other fighters to supplement or verified the topic that is being discussed on the main topic

I think it's normal that if you comment on page 7 of a thread you're interested in, you should read at least the first page and the page you're going to comment on, or pages 1-2 and 6-7, because in general, when a thread gets longer nobody reads all the pages, especially if you're commenting for the first time.

I myself have commented on some topics that need correction from the previous post and my topic is not related to the main topic but it does add value to the topic

But not reading the first page, especially if the thread is only one page long is a cardinal sin.

It's important to read the main topic but if all the posts only address the main discussion without looking for other posts to correct or verify we will have all replies redundant

I'm about to send a PM to the manager so he doesn't pay him for that post.

What do you think about this?

You can send a message to the manager but let him decide based on his criteria and not your criteria

[lovesmayfamilis]

There are many posts where users go away from the topic of the first post and quote those who responded recently, allegedly maintaining the meaning of the conversation. But this behavior also sometimes proves that users do not read all posts, but choose for themselves the most convenient way to post the next post, which should count towards the quota. I don’t know if it makes sense to re-read all twenty or thirty pages when the answer is already obvious in the first posts of the topic. It would be reasonable to close topics in which communication takes place according to the parrot principle; repeating the same answers, and paraphrasing in your own way is unlikely to be useful to those who are looking for advice or, on the contrary, giving advice.

[BenCodie]

It would be much easier to have an opinion if we saw the post.

Otherwise, I would say Despario is right in what he said, other than it is a loophole. If one just wants to reply directly to the OP and share their opinion directly relating to that, then they can. Maybe it's a little careless and people should scroll through before they post in case of a duplicate opinion, it would be a bit hard to enforce though.

It would be good if we could track obvious cases of this over time to measure how common this is.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

I'd say it's a loophole.

His post is on topic because he gives his opinion to the @OP's post and it's constructive as long as his post has a weight, right?

I sort of agree with you but not no the constructive part one as he is commenting on something already proven false.

You can send a message to the manager but let him decide based on his criteria and not your criteria

Of course, Hhampuz will have his own criteria and I am not the one to tell him what he has to pay or not. Besides, if it's only once, I might give him a pass. As I think I will do, because I said I would send him the PM because I was angry to see that he hasn't even read the first page, but if I find more cases like that I will do it.

[Mpamaegbu]

It would be much easier to have an opinion if we saw the post.

Exactly! We can't be winking in the dark on this and expect anyone to decode the sign. Who knows, some other members might learn a thing or two if the vexatious post is disclosed here.

It's important to read the main topic but if all the posts only address the main discussion without looking for other posts to correct or verify we will have all replies redundant

Most times, these "sideline posts" even make the threads page turners and interesting read as they expose angles the OP or other users may not have thought of. I'm sure, there's no one here who hasn't partaken or made "correction" posts.

[_act_]

I'm about to send a PM to the manager so he doesn't pay him for that post.

What do you think about this?

You do not need to message his manager for now. This is very common on this forum. Just start to be checking the first page, you will see other posts that will be saying what others have posted in the beginning of a thread. You can first message them and warn them. If they do not accept warning or still doing like that, then you can report the person to his campaign manager.

[Churchillvv]

This is the second time in a short time that I've seen someone comment on a thread on the first page without having read the previous comments. Does this happen a lot?

Yeah it happens alot, most time I see it to caused by misleading topics/titles, some people use bot notification on telegram and this bot delivers only the titles and the first statement of the thread so people sometimes only read the title/topic having see the topic to be very interesting to them so they immediately write base on the topic or title. when posted or when the thread is finally read. They tend to find out the title is very difficult from what body of the thread is talking about. Thereby making the comments look stupid or off discussion before if looked at very well you might find it has little to what the thread of title of thread is talking about.

But not reading the first page, especially if the thread is only one page long is a cardinal sin.

I'm about to send a PM to the manager so he doesn't pay him for that post.

What do you think about this?

Not reading the first page is very bad because it the foundation to what anyone should be contributing to any thread, but sending a PM to a manager not to pay a campaign participant is not really advisable for me because I believe the action it too quick. Before sanction can be implemented, caution must be given first at least the offender should be warn before carrying out any sanction thou it is to the campaign manager to decide.

I think OPs of a thread are to lock the thread whenever it reaches a certain number of pages and his question is answered already. If anyone does have anything else to say, he can create another thread for his issue.

Most times I have seen senior colleagues commenting numerous list of threads that are related thereby correcting OPs of thread that such thread have been created already your suggestion that it should be locked can make same type of question repeat itself maybe in different forms.

[rat03gopoh]

In cases like this, I will look at the weight of the topic and also previous replies.
I think it's just an attempt to re-present the previous reply(es) in their own way. There are some users who like to get straight to the point, so the replies they make are sometimes too short and don't explain enough for others.
Also, a user can have many ignore lists.

[digaran]

Funny, rather ironic to see you talking about such a subject, I believe you left a neutral tag on me claiming I'm posting spam to reach a quota, yet your reference points to a thread of mine with only a few replies, which if you had completely read the other replies, you would have understood that my post was a sarcastic respond to other replies, but since you are a sig spammer, and a DT abuser, you didn't care to read the other replies, and now you even have an opportunity to do more sig spam.

Now go a head and put your nose in people's posts and act as if you are a moderator, or a DT police, I guess the shame is on you. eh?

[Lucius]

This is the second time in a short time that I've seen someone comment on a thread on the first page without having read the previous comments. Does this happen a lot?

Unfortunately, this is something that is a daily occurrence on the forum, because for some, reading other people's posts is obviously a waste of time. It's not just a problem in spam megathreads of 10+ pages, but also in threads of only 1 or 2 pages where you can see older members asking questions that were answered just a few posts above.

There are several options that we can do when we notice such behavior :

1. Report such a post to the moderator as repetitive content/signature spam - and hope that after the deleted post the user will realize that he did something wrong.

2. Publicly warn the user to read what others have written before him in the hope that he will accept the suggestion and be more appropriate in his posts in the future.

3. Report such a user to his campaign manager (if he is in a sig. campaign), although it should be remembered that each manager determines the rules when it comes to megathreads and to which page the post can be paid.

4. Put the user on ignore and pretend that nothing is happening, which is the easiest option, but for me personally, it is also the worst because then nothing will change for sure.

[Bitcoin Smith]

4. Put the user on ignore and pretend that nothing is happening, which is the easiest option, but for me personally, it is also the worst because then nothing will change for sure.

Ignore the users who is having the only intention of trolling and for that ignore option is really helpful but to tackle spammers report to moderators should be the tool, and if the user is having this as habit then eventually they will be in the risk of getting temp banned at least for multiple deleted reports for spam as reason.

[adultcrypto]

This is the second time in a short time that I've seen someone comment on a thread on the first page without having read the previous comments. Does this happen a lot?

It is practically impossible for all the comments in a particular thread to align with the opinion or views of the OP, hence, there are some comments that can be made to correct or throw more light on what is being discussed. If such comments are made, I do not see anything wrong because it is all about engagement and making the discussion elaborate. It only becomes bad if the comment does not flow into the discussion.

This also happens in other forums, and it is something we have commented on in our local board. Here the payment for signature campaigns may have an influence, but I visit other forums and if I comment on a thread for the first time on page 23, there's no way I've read the previous 23 pages.

But not reading the first page, especially if the thread is only one page long is a cardinal sin.

I'm about to send a PM to the manager so he doesn't pay him for that post.

What do you think about this?

Many signature campaign managers expect their participants to criticize, ask questions and contribute to discussion in this forum and this is what they are paid for as they show the visibility of the project they are promoting. If they fail to make meaningful contribution or deviate entirely from the topic of discussion, then they might not be paid and might be reprimanded for bad representation. Therefore, if the said comment does not correlate with the topic of discussion, your actions might yield results else it will amount to a futile effort.

[FatFork]

Does this happen a lot?

Yeah, it happens a lot especially in Altcoins board.

Yeah, we can't overlook the Gambling board either.  And in the Bitcoin Discussion, Beginners & Help boards too...  This issue pops up all over the forum all the time.  Some folks don't seem to think reading other people's posts is worth their time. Especially when they're trying to squeeze in 50-60 posts a week for their sig. campaigns.

[Text]

It's like jumping into a movie halfway through and pretending you know the plot. I get the frustration, it can often lead to misunderstandings and repetition. But I think it's important to follow the etiquette of commenting on forum threads. It’s indeed a common courtesy to read previous comments before adding your own, especially if the thread isn’t too long. This helps maintain the flow of the conversation and prevents the repetition of points already made.
Sending a PM to the manager might be a bit like calling for the referee in a game, but if it helps maintain the integrity of the discussion, why not? It's up to the manager to decide whether or not to pay the commenter.
Just two cents of my opinion.

[m2017]

I'm about to send a PM to the manager so he doesn't pay him for that post.

Are you talking about the signature campaign manager? And what will this manager have to do? Give him an exam on his knowledge of the content of previous posts from pages 1 to 23?

And so with each post and with each participant of signature campaigns? Seriously, how do you plan to determine whether a poster has read past posts of other forum members or not?

This is the second time in a short time that I've seen someone comment on a thread on the first page without having read the previous comments.

How did you determine this? Do you have psychic abilities or did that poster admit it himself?

It seems to me that discussing this problem will lead nowhere.

[Samlucky O]

This is the second time in a short time that I've seen someone comment on a thread on the first page without having read the previous comments. Does this happen a lot?

I think it's normal that if you comment on page 7 of a thread you're interested in, you should read at least the first page and the page you're going to comment on, or pages 1-2 and 6-7, because in general, when a thread gets longer nobody reads all the pages, especially if you're commenting for the first time.

This also happens in other forums, and it is something we have commented on in our local board. Here the payment for signature campaigns may have an influence, but I visit other forums and if I comment on a thread for the first time on page 23, there's no way I've read the previous 23 pages.

But not reading the first page, especially if the thread is only one page long is a cardinal sin.

I'm about to send a PM to the manager so he doesn't pay him for that post.

What do you think about this?

I think this has been a problem for sometimes now. many people seems to conclude a thread by it's topic and I see the reason to that which are:
1)signature campegn with up to 60 post maximum a week. When dey try to meet the quota of post per week, dey make unnecessary post to cover up there post count.

2)They always feel that there is no need to explain again, perhaps people who has commented has already explain it all so need to again.

3)they always find it difficult to read. They sees it as stress to them, saying who cares if I make a quality post or Read through the forum before commenting.

4) always find it difficult to read a thread that is above 2 pages just as the op said.
With my little knowledge that is what I discovered.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

LMAO I couldn't miss in this very thread one who hasn't caught what I say in the OP.

Are you talking about the signature campaign manager? And what will this manager have to do? Give him an exam on his knowledge of the content of previous posts from pages 1 to 23?

And so with each post and with each participant of signature campaigns? Seriously, how do you plan to determine whether a poster has read past posts of other forum members or not?

Read the OP again. But slowly and carefully, eh? Don't insist on making a fool of yourself.

How did you determine this? Do you have psychic abilities or did that poster admit it himself?

It seems to me that discussing this problem will lead nowhere.

With people like you who either read so fast or have such poor reading comprehension that you haven't picked up on anything I say in the OP, the conversation is sure to go nowhere.