[Abernathy]

If I read a post that consists simply of a URL, on any thread, I won't click on it. I'll just move on to read a post where the OP has bothered to write some original content of his/her own.

If you do post a link, please say something about why you think it is important/interesting/relevant, or make a joke about it, or something. Something that will make me click on the link. Just posting a link and nothing else looks lazy and disengaged, in my view, and as I say, I'll always simply pass over such posts.

It's not that difficult, chums. If you're guilty of this, I hope you know who you are.

[The Weeping Angel]

Come on Abernathy I do try to get people interested when I post a link.

[Abernathy]

Come on Abernathy I do try to get people interested when I post a link.

No, I'm afraid you don't. In fact you're one of the worst offenders.

[The Weeping Angel]

What? Sorry whenever I post a link I try to describe what the article/blog post is about.

[Daley Mayle]

If I read a post that consists simply of a URL, on any thread, I won't click on it. I'll just move on to read a post where the OP has bothered to write some original content of his/her own.

If you do post a link, please say something about why you think it is important/interesting/relevant, or make a joke about it, or something. Something that will make me click on the link. Just posting a link and nothing else looks lazy and disengaged, in my view, and as I say, I'll always simply pass over such posts.

It's not that difficult, chums. If you're guilty of this, I hope you know who you are.

+1

I also appreciate the efforts of people who do a Readers' Digest of Littlejohn's column that gives me a taste* of his cuntery and not have to add yet another hit to his clickrate.

* Imagine licking the area round the floor of a tuna fishing boat's toilet.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Quite.

I don't think 3 words is enough!

Whilst we're at it, could we encourage people to check their posts before they poke 'send' and make sure they make sense? It only takes a second and it's good manners.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

I think there's an issue here about all sorts of usage.

This board is, by and large, populated by intelligent people who, by and large, know how to write a sentence.
There are people, however, who write unpunctuated, almost stream of consciousness posts which are hard or impossible to decipher. That isn't courteous to other board members. It's low standards, although some seem to be perfectly happy with that.

Just because the poster can hear what he is saying in his head doesn't mean that his readers can follow. Posts need to be read over before sending, checking that they are comprehensible.

I have a 'difficulty' with literality. If I see something I understand it to mean exactly what it says - just slight Asperger's. But easy-to-correct spelling mistakes, poor or missing punctuation, missing words and other egregiousness cause me (and I suspect others) problems.

[Abernathy]

There are still people (clue: they often have "Littlejohn" as part of their user name) who seem to think that posting a URL along with a single cryptic line alluding *very* obliquely to the content of the posted URL is a useful contribution to this forum (I find the assumption that I will automatically click on the URL frankly offensive). It most emphatically is not. it's useless. It seems crazy that I need to reiterate again that I will simply ignore such postings. Which of course negates the intention of the OP.

We need you to contribute constructively and creatively. Analyse stuff, however briefly. Form opinions, and tell us why you hold that opinion. If you're critical, do it rationally, and calmly. Don't just, for pity's sake, garble out some keyboard mush and hope that's the business. You can do it. Just take a minute.

[The Weeping Angel]

Or you could try clicking on the link.

[Abernathy]

QED.

[SoulBoy]

There are still people (clue: they often have "Littlejohn" as part of their user name) who seem to think that posting a URL along with a single cryptic line alluding *very* obliquely to the content of the posted URL is a useful contribution to this forum (I find the assumption that I will automatically click on the URL frankly offensive). It most emphatically is not. it's useless. It seems crazy that I need to reiterate again that I will simply ignore such postings.

D'ya know what grinds my gears? Unnecessary tautology...

delivered with a smile and a wink, for the avoidance of doubt.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Repetition for emphasis?

Must say I agree with Abers. I don't click on simple links with no gloss.

And a way of choosing which threads are displayed would be nice.

[Kreuzberger]

As we have now, by default, established that the term "untermensch" is acceptable as an insult to Jews, could we please have some guidance on Polack, Paki, Nigger, Yiddo, Spazz, Spick, Pikey and Gypo?

No progressive, fun-loving human could fail to make the connection between political disagreement and the years of endless fun of herding six million battered, starved, raped and tortured individuals to their death at the sharp end of a shovel so it would be a crying shame to limit the bigotry to just one group.

This, on the day that the publication of Shami Chakrabarti’s inquiry into antisemitism in the party is published, and all that.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

I think you're right. We should be above that.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

I've had the point made to me that such usage on the public-facing sections of the forum will give a poor, and generally untrue, impression of our beliefs and values.