Advertisement
There are 1467 members in this tribe, but fewer than 10 that respond with any regularity. most posts are from 5 or so.
So how many of you are, "read only" people ? All you have to do is answer, " me" , it wont hurt, I promise. Just put your fingers on the keyboard, OK now start.......
So how many of you are, "read only" people ? All you have to do is answer, " me" , it wont hurt, I promise. Just put your fingers on the keyboard, OK now start.......
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 5:55 AMActually, how many are people who haven't logged into Tribe for months (maybe years)? -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 5:58 AMHmmmm, If they haven't logged on to tribe for however long, it would make it kind of hard for them to answer, wouldn't it ? -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 7:32 AMsshhhshh--they are sleeping--
-
-
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 7:44 AMPick is right....I am napping...shshsh
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 9:11 AMI try to respond, but sometimes the tribe no longer feels *friendly*? and I find myself more and more reluctant to respond to posts. -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 10:30 AMI do both depending on topic and how I feel or shall I say how sarcastic I am at the time.
have seen many drop out of tribe in part due to problems with tribe crashing all the time. -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 11:05 AMI respond sometimes, too, but rarely. Sometimes there's just too much to read, or the topic doesn't grab me. Also, yes, the constant crashing makes tribe less attractive. But I do love the conversations, generally.
-
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 11:40 AMI sure like your voice when you do post, lori, and i think the tribe would be a lot friendlier for your greater participation.
-
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 1:38 PMI just came back to tribe a few months ago. I had life going on and it just didn't consist of Tribe. I actually came back to delete my profile but decided I still wanted to give RW a shot. I don't read all posts, rather just the ones that grab my attention. It usually is based on the topic or who is posting it or both. Some people's styles I jive with and others I don't.
The topics seem to be just too much to respond to. Either the issue is so huge it is hard to pin point what to respond to or some people's posts are just waaaaayyyy too long and wordy, or they post an entire article. That is just too much for me, I don't have time to scrutinize over every word in those kinds of posts (which usually, also, tend to be the issues that are just too big to tackle in a favorable one to three paragraph response). Furthermore I find RW has turned rather debate-ey, and not necessarily in a good way. More hostile than it used to be. I like a good banter and posting of positions just as the next person, but I don't like the hostility and lengthy posts that come with it.
I am staying, however, and wanting to see what direction RW takes in the future. I would love to hear new voices...especially new "old" voices on here. -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 2:27 PM"I sure like your voice when you do post, lori, and i think the tribe would be a lot friendlier for your greater participation. "
Thank you wil, I really appreciate your posts, also.
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 6:08 AMDitto that, Sage! Also, as a general rule, I don't look at links. Don't have time for them.
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 7:03 AMI agree Sage. I don't like posts that take up an entire page or links. I like to hear a person's personal thoughts, not an article. Some days I just don't have the energy to respond to anything. I try to make it short, sweet, and too the point. -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 9:52 AM>I try to make it short, sweet, and too the point.
That's my motto! If I can't say it in two or three paragraphs, I suspect it might not be worth saying.
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 9:57 AMI think it's all about the signal to noise ratio.
This vs thing bothers me here. I mean , we really have not way of knowing how many lurkers are out there and they have the element of surprise on us big time. I'm afraid us responders would get our asses kicked and so i hope we can cooperate and make peace.
-
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 11:39 AMMy feeling is that when I choose to respond on a thread in any tribe, I am speaking to an unknown audience that may or may not be on my side. But that's the fun of it! If you are uncomfortable with lurkers, form a private tribe of only the people you know will respond. Otherwise, that's just the nature of the beast.
As for ass-kicking, I don't know quite what you mean by that. I think folks here in RW tend to be pretty polite.
>we really have not way of knowing how many lurkers are out there and they have the element of surprise on us big time. I'm afraid us responders would get our asses kicked and so i hope we can cooperate and make peace. -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 12:23 PMOh hell, MissMini, that was just another of my lame attempts at humor. Pay it no mind. I actually like lurkers, and hope to wise up enough to join their ranks more often. -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 1:36 PMOh heck, I'm guitly of posting articles and more than two paragraphs. The problem of being a natural speed reader is that one forgets people read and absorb information at different rates that aren't necessarily mine. I really mean to overwhelm, but I get involved with many subjects and probably get too intense. That's just me, though.
But I read a lot of the posts and respond to some that I feel drawn to or have an opinion about. I do learn from you all, it does sometimes modify my thinking on a subject, and in that sense I still grow. That in itself makes checking out tribe worthwhile.
The one big difference is that I don't do television at all (no cable no satellite no nothing) and I have loads more time to sit and read what you all are talking about compared to the average US citizen who spends an enormous amount of time every single day (hours and hours) in front of those damn things!!! I've always been a reader and now even more so...
-
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 1:39 PM....oops, meant "don't mean to overwhelm." New keyboard and not my old split one and I can't type nearly as well because my damn wrists are bent wrong and my fingers keep missing the keys!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 7:50 PMI am here more than never.
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 8:40 PMin this tribe i view thread titles 100% of the time, enter a thread ~50% of the time, post/respond to a thread ~5% of the time, and start a thread ~1% of the time.
in other tribes it'd be the same except for enter a thread which varies ~10% to ~100% of the time.
posts aimed directly at me i respond to, unless i didn't see.
mostly i internally respond to what i read... i respond in my mind and emotions, compose actual interactions in my head, do research on the web, yet most never make it out... i'd need a direct interface into my head to be able to manifest myself more obviously around here, maybe cause i'm too lazy to slow my thoughts down where my fingers can keep up with them... usually flow to fast and then they gone and i'm on to the next thought. :)
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 11:15 PMI think a lot of people joined, then just wandered away, but it makes tribes numbers look good. -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 4:28 AMyes your right I think curmmy.... -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 6:08 PMI evidently, as most here know, actively respond to most of the posts. Like BadAss, I do not follow things posted with a link all of the time. I never open a YouTube if it's put up either. Long postings must grab me, and most of seal's posts do. So, even if they're long, they're often worthy of the read. -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 6:37 PMyeah.,i know what you mean on long post.,i dont watch TV-no cable or satellite for 20 years now.,and my minds much freer of the clutter--no comercials--i like seals writing too-hes articulate--and down to earth--its a pleasure to be amongst such people.,im learning a little bit here and there.,its cool -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 7:22 PMi find myself becoming more foa reader as my damm PC seems to get slower and slower. Need a new PC...but don't want vista. lol -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 8:19 PMfind someone to build one for you and load XP. -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Fri, November 13, 2009 - 12:22 PMI still respond to topics that interest me, but politics and, as others have mentioned, huge issues that there seems little point to me in getting embroiled in, they just don't interest me, and they interfere with my trying to keep my mind free of confusion, anger, and feelings of futility. The general content of posts has changed in this group, and although I think a lot of the active posters don't realize it, people who aren't into this content have drifted off. It used to have a quite different feel to it, a lighter tone, which I miss. There are plenty of tribes that are there specifically for people to argue and debate about such issues. I don't join those but somehow . . . I feel like I'm in one anyway. Hanging in for the occasional thing that's relevant to me.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Sat, November 14, 2009 - 5:12 AMI try to check out all the posts, even if I have to skim. Sometimes I get really behind, like this week.
Some posts just grab me and an idea or thought pops into my head, and I respond. I don't post responses every day or to every thread, but I post every few days I think.
I'll bet there's 500 or 600 people who just read, but read regularly. That's OK. The great thing about RW and groups like this is that you can participate any way you want, learn and get inspired any way you want.
I would echo what a few of you said - a lot of the posts here are awesome. Thought-provoking and soulful. Truly excellent Tribe. Awesome people. -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Wed, November 18, 2009 - 8:21 PMI have been away from Tribe for a while now.
I've been missing it though but didn't have enough time to devote to it and I have to admit Facebook is one reason why.
I was so reluctant to try Facebook, then I did after a party with some friends and have been having fun with it, honestly, to me it's all about the people but I've been "there" a lot and missing Tribe yet knowing I "needed" such a phase but I'm back tonight and I'm so happy....
I think I mostly read almost all posts, try to respond if I have something to share...
As a Gemini I might respond a lot, but I'm not sure, I can't really tell...
One thing is for sure, this Tribe is the best!
Love to all,
Sandrine. -
-
Re: readers vs. responders
Thu, November 19, 2009 - 9:07 AMI tend to read, get bored, then sign off without posting. No, I couldn't ever read all the posts but try to read all the posts I see from members I get a kick out of. But I do believe if a tree falls in the forest and there's no one around to hear it the tree still made a sound, so in a way, when people post they're makin' some noise - and I'm all for some noise.
-
-