It takes good writing to hold my attention too. As for sharing posts on Hubski that I don't read fully, I do it all the time. Almost every time I do this it has to do with the comments in the thread. I'll share a post that has a good back and forth between mk and cliffelam or b_b after reading their conversation without having read what prompted it. I feel like I have a responsibility to let others know that theres a cool conversation going on. I do this often.
You are so responsible.
I know you think I'm the bee's knees... but these are not particularly responsible knees. I often start to contribute to a discussion and then delete my message before posting it because I'm called away or just change my mind. I go to a lot of trouble thinking of a response and then delete it. I'm about to even delete this one... YIKES I'M GETTING a 502 BAD GATEWAY ON THIS... maybe I should delete it.
(oh good, it finally posted)I feel like I have a responsibility to let others know that there's a cool conversation going on
and then there's the thoughts that come up while reading people's comments that do not even make it to the reply box -- so for example, this morning I was thinking about your comment which I read last night. Step 1 - hey I'm noticing myself thinking about b_b's comment Step 2 - and my thought was ... Step 3 - write it... but wait, this isn't what I was actually thinking... this is a meta-response, as they say in litcrit -- a response about responding (I have a feeling humanodon knows of what I speak), I start to write and then get distracted in a McLuhanesque way, the medium being the message Step 4 - Delete response, it wasn't what I was thinking anyway. ha ha, I won't incur the wrath of b_b... in fact my thought this morning was this: when I visit Hubski during the day, I first look for "text" -- what's on someone's mind today? Then I look for something with several comments: what are people saying today?
My question to you: are you aware of a process or do you just skim down the headings?
Note: when I open a newspaper, I often go to the letters to the editor first.
The reason is this: EVERYTHING written anywhere is subjective, including the headlines, the choice of headlines, and so on. At least in the letters and op-ed columns they admit their subjectivity. Does that make sense? thenewgreen do you have a process in your skimming of your feed? So you are right. Now I'll hit reply.
I go to "chatter" a lot and I go to the first global page quite a bit to see new posts with no votes. If there's an interesting post that doesn't have a comment and I feel like I have something to say or wish to give it acknowledgment beyond a "share," I will comment. Sometimes, literally just to say "wow, that was amazing" or something similar, which doesn't necessarily spark amazing conversation but sometimes I genuinely think something is amazing and have to say so. I look in chatter for conversations that are happening and will only join in if I have something to ad. If I read something that I have a question about, I'll post that. I tend to shout-out to people when I know they'll have an answer to a question that someone else has posed. For example. I also will leave links to past posts/comments in my comments. I spend a lot of time here and have a catalog of past posts and conversations kicking around in my head and I like for others to see some of the cool things that have happened in the past. For example, remember when I posted the link to caio's post My name is Harvey Pekar to your post? So I skim the feed both for things I want to read, conversations I'd like to join and places where I can link to past posts/comments that may be relevant. It's fun. Lots of fun.
I couldn't agree more. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. When we talk to one another IRL, we aren't so particular. A good conversation doesn't require perfect, but it does require a reply.