[Help] Post length

[Eric the meek]

Working age = low tolerance.
Retired = high tolerance. (Unless impatient, in which case zero tolerance).

Less is more.

 

[Chicken Run]

I have made a conscious effort to be more succinct lately owing to the griping and snide comments (and the funny TL-DR quips from one or two - point taken). Sometimes more words are needed for clarity. If the OP and others are troubled by this, don't read the post

(I am aware that another verbose poster is, like me, on tha autism spectrum meaning we often fail to take into account the extent to which leisurely clarification is counter productive. This is not 'self importance'. It is in fact the opposite, a desire to be clear and not mislead. A kindness in fact. So the OP has rather annoyed me with the snide comments and I shall therefore invite him to f*** Off )

That’s right, make it all about you

 

[Simster]

...

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

I would read a longer post on occasion if it’s well written and it seems as if the poster is sensible and seems to know what they’re talking about. You can usually tell fairly soon.

otherwise. 2 or 3 paragraphs.

i think it was Oscar Wilde who once said (or rather wrote) ”l’m sending you a long letter because I haven’t got time to write a short one. I often try to edit things I write myself.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I would read a longer post on occasion if it’s well written and it seems as if the poster is sensible and seems to know what they’re talking about. You can usually tell fairly soon.

otherwise. 2 or 3 paragraphs.

i think it was Oscar Wilde who once said (or rather wrote) ”l’m sending you a long letter because I haven’t got time to write a short one. I often try to edit things I write myself.

One of my colleagues prefaces a long reply with "I don't have the time to be succinct"

 

[dazzer6666]

That’s right, make it all about you

Other verbose posters are available

 

[dazzer6666]

But it was me, though, wasn't it, though?

(I have already apologised for being pissy, and explained why I was, so we should be able to leave it there, OK?)

You weren't the poster that immediately sprung to mind for me (sorry if you're disappointed )

 

[Simster]

...

 

[Whitechapel]

I mean this with absolutely no malice to anyone, but some people just write in a very boring manner. It’s not the length of the post, it’s the length combined with an incredibly unengaging writing style.

A long post from somebody who is clearly very passionate or knowledgable about a topic can be a fantastic read. Likewise somebody with a distinctive flair to their writing style can make a long post worth it. Sadly some posters on here are akin to an overly-enthusiastic AI and just spew never ending words that might be true but it doesn’t matter because your eyes glazed over two sentences in.

Or to put it more succinctly; Andy Naylor is paid to write for a living, but nobody is clamouring for his debut novel.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Sorry to have a mild pop at you @Simster. I am trying to be succincter. I even invented a new word, just there, to save a word.

Unfortunately tho, to the skim reader, your new word reads like sphincter

 

[Whitechapel]

Oh and variety helps too.

If you normally post short/normal length messages and then post something longer then I’ll assume you have something interesting to say.

If you always post mammoth messages then I’ll quickly learn you have nothing to say and a lot of time to say it.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

How long does a post have to be on here before you just decide not to bother reading it? I don't mean a quote from an external article, I mean pure unadulterated opinion. For me it does depend on the poster in question but as a rule of thumb I'd say that anything more than say 7 or 8 sentences.

I'm sure everyone is different on this, but there are surely a couple of posters on here who are clearly blissfully unaware of this unspoken tolerance. Those people probably need to realise that essays don't really ever get read even if they are agreeable and well constructed, and in fact they are counterproductive as they make that poster look horrifically self-important and arrogant, that people care so much what they think that they are going to read their chapter of War & Peace.

So this isn't a go at anyone in particular, I'm just wondering what individual tolerances are. I would say that the length of this post is slightly under my own personal tolderance.

Interesting thread.

I’m usually very busy during my NSC reading periods (getting ready for work, lunch etc), so perhaps a couple of paragraphs.

I prefer people to be succinct and to the point, but similar to yourself there are a fairly significant number of posters, who I very much respect, so may allow a third para

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Unfortunately tho, to the skim reader, your new word reads like sphincter

Brilliant

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Depends on the subject matter more than the length but more than three paragraphs and I’ll probably give up. Self important twats

 

[Simster]

...

 

[Simster]

...

 

[Questions]

Whoever they are I’m against them.

 

[Simster]

...

 

[aftershavedave]

Generally, no more than a couple of paragraphs. Any longer can telegraph a self-important missive coming up which I'll ignore. It's much helped by the ignore facility as is avoiding an avalanche of posts from some users

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

There used to be a saying in ye olde punk rock days 'if it can’t be said in three minutes, it’s not worth saying'. Clearly bolleaux, mind.

Still, running with the general principle, I'd wager good money that there's an option to limit the number of characters in a post, on this or any other messageboard