Do you read all the threads and posts here?

There is such a wealth of excellent information here in most all of these threads that reading every thread and every post is indeed a good use of one's time. But, due to time constraints at least, and probably personal interests as well, that may not always be possible for all of us.

Also, the threads in this forum seem to fall into two general categories: (1) technical, highly clinical, scientific, discussions about specific medications, treatments or physicians, or highly detailed personal histories, and (2) psychological, anecdotal , encouraging, personal feelings or reactions, leisure threads (often personal things about us, or light discussion topics), and generally anything of a non-technical nature.

Both are very valid and useful types of threads, and both serve the purposes of our forum membership, but perhaps not every thread is for everybody.

Personally, I try to read through every thread a least quickly, for the simple reason that I usually learn new and valuable things from even those threads whose topics do not initially seem to be of significance to me. I also like to keep up with the personal situations that are often expressed in those threads by fellow regular posters, enabling me to often empathize with them later in follow-up posts where appropriate.

No right or wrong answers, but it should be interesting to see how we as a whole decide to do our reading here in the forum.

posts that are longer than two paragraphs are seldom read unless I know the person or it really grabs me from the get-go.  don't read anything by the diatribers and very little from the self-appointed "advocates".

ed

 

no way can one truly read everything here.

I have a list of people whom I think post truly valuable and emotionally important stuff and I will always read there stuff. I like their personalities and that makes a big difference.

I will read posts by new members explaining their situation as I think the best advice here is always to help them put their new situation in perspective and provide examples of how well we can do. It's
not a death sentence in most cases and they should understand that.

I totally ignore the posts/threads of academic/soapbox/propaganda nature or those by self appointed advocates. I'd do that in any social setting or forum regardless of issue.

I don't read threads like that Gat Goran thread.

I try to read less and less as I am starting to believe that moving away from such a setting is the best way to move on in life. That is my personal belief. I am starting to maintain a cyber relationship via blogs, emails, photography apps with the people I am drawn to here as often, in my opinion, a one on one "relationship" with these people is far more rewarding than having one and exhibiting for anyone and everyone on a site with a lot of traffic such as this. For instance, I'll never understand the posts where one poster is constantly patting another on the back and vice versa praising each others thoughts and imagined contributions. Wy not do that offline? It's performance in my opinion.

I would write something original, but instead will agree with what ed (F8) wrote.

Yes, as a general rule, I read every post in every thread. Some, I pass over quickly, if I am not interested or if there is nothing useful I can contribute. But feel its important to see whatever one is saying or thinking.

I took speed reading many years ago, so it doesn't take me long to zoom through what has changed since the last time I looked.

David

In general, I ignore metaconversations (this being a rare exception). Metaconversations are conversations about conversations. There's nothing that kills a good conversation faster than taking it to the meta level. Ad hominems, flames, personal feelings about posters, etc. fall into this category because they are not about the subject at hand. For example, I ignore posts like "Jane, you ignorant ****..." or "your hidden agenda is..." or "that post was inflammatory." Humor, kindness, and a genuine desire to be helpful always get my attention.

Along with Casey, I ignore posts that are links without comment or relation to meaningful issues. I subscribe to the New Prostate Cancer Infolink, Medscape, "prostate cancer" on Google News, etc., so I've probably already seen it and may have commented there already.

I do read the headlines about experiences with disease progression or symptoms, good and bad, but don't comment unless there's something I think I can add or back up what someone else has said.

The subjects I look for include patient empowerment and decision-making, evidence-based medicine, misinformation, and treatment alternatives.

If the grammar is really bad, I usually will not struggle through it unless I know the poster to be a non-native-English speaker.

I generally respond without reading the thread. Much more fun that way.