Lit🌎World ©️🏴‍☠️pet peeves

[Shi_One81]

When threads seem to be completely dominated by the same group of people, it makes me not want to participate

 

[Chillygirl]

When threads seem to be completely dominated by the same group of people, it makes me not want to participate

To add to this….when it’s the same people listed repeatedly in the NAL threads. (Last time I checked there were more than a dozen people on lit )

 

[JerseyJade]

To add to this….when it’s the same people listed repeatedly in the NAL threads. (Last time I checked there was more than a dozen people on lit )

This! I don't even go in there anymore. It makes me cringe.

 

[Shi_One81]

To add to this….when it’s the same people listed repeatedly in the NAL threads. (Last time I checked there were more than a dozen people on lit )

This! I don't even go in there anymore. It makes me cringe.

Yes, this 100%!

 

[Silk_Princess]

When threads seem to be completely dominated by the same group of people, it makes me not want to participate

To add to this….when it’s the same people listed repeatedly in the NAL threads. (Last time I checked there were more than a dozen people on lit )

This! I don't even go in there anymore. It makes me cringe.

Yes, this 100%!

I think one issue there (the NAL threads) are the number of questions that focus on people's social relationships and private interactions -- i.e., which Litster do *you* talk with every day, who do *you* find sexy, etc. A lot of those wind up being circular, and presuppose that you have active social relationships with individuals on the forums, which not everyone does. One way to re-frame the exercise to encourage greater participation, especially by newcomers and infrequent posters, might to instead ask people to self-identify in response to certain questions and focus on more objective qualities , e.g. "I'm a Litster that . . . [has a pet turtle, hates to cook, has three arms, etc.]" So it's more like an ice-breaking exercise, rather than demonstrating your familiarity with other posters on Lit, which can make it seem more clubbish even if that's not the intent. Just a suggestion for those who may be interested - I myself am not looking to start any new threads at the moment.

 

[cheekygirl75]

Litsters in the A-Z threads who don't know how the alphabet works...

Guilty, sorry! I think I've finally gotten it in my head that 'U' doesn't come after 'Q' in the alphabet (thought it should)!

 

[SassySheDevil]

People posting others pictures. I don't know why this bothers me so much. I guess because I always worry that person doesn't know their pics are being posted.

 

[cheekygirl75]

People posting others pictures. I don't know why this bothers me so much. I guess because I always worry that person doesn't know their pics are being posted.

Ew, who does that? Unless it's a group photo, I totally agree... post your own only! (Well, I post my dog's but I think she'd be okay with it )

 

[SassySheDevil]

Ew, who does that? Unless it's a group photo, I totally agree... post your own only! (Well, I post my dog's but I think she'd be okay with it )

See it a lot in AmPics. It's always their girlfriend/wife/friend.

 

[cheekygirl75]

See it a lot in AmPics. It's always their girlfriend/wife/friend.

That's gross

 

[ToPleaseHim]

I think one issue there (the NAL threads) are the number of questions that focus on people's social relationships and private interactions -- i.e., which Litster do *you* talk with every day, who do *you* find sexy, etc. A lot of those wind up being circular, and presuppose that you have active social relationships with individuals on the forums, which not everyone does. One way to re-frame the exercise to encourage greater participation, especially by newcomers and infrequent posters, might to instead ask people to self-identify in response to certain questions and focus on more objective qualities , e.g. "I'm a Litster that . . . [has a pet turtle, hates to cook, has three arms, etc.]" So it's more like an ice-breaking exercise, rather than demonstrating your familiarity with other posters on Lit, which can make it seem more clubbish even if that's not the intent. Just a suggestion for those who may be interested - I myself am not looking to start any new threads at the moment.

I think this is a great idea. Do you mind if I start it?

 

[Stopokochac]

When I spent 5 minutes typing a reply to one of those "Poster above you" thread, and when I hit post, two people have beaten me. It should count from when you START typing, because not everyone likes to type short answers. Or it should show you who else is responding.

 

[tnman03]

See it a lot in AmPics. It's always their girlfriend/wife/friend.

Yes, and the "Rate my...or... I just got permission from____ to post these, are pretty much suspicious. It should be set up where if there's any indication you're not identified as the person in the picture then that's an automatic thread deletion.

 

[SassySheDevil]

People excusing bad behavior by saying "It's just the internet" What the fuck does that matter? Internet or not doesn't mean it's okay to be an asshole.

 

[Dribble]

People excusing bad behavior by saying "It's just the internet" What the fuck does that matter? Internet or not doesn't mean it's okay to be an asshole.

I second this.

But at the same time. I'd rather know their true nature and the bottom line is if they do it online...they will do it offline too. Excuse makers can't be trusted.

Sorry you've been hurt.

 

[Diosax]

Crying/moping all over the forum all the time. ALL the time

 

[aussiegeekygal]

Quoting pictures

We used to be so good at editing out pictures and links to pictures when we replied to them. That is slipping away and it's not ok.

It's a safety issue.

Don't be a douche canoe.
Edit your replies out of consideration for the OP, please!

 

[QuietCanadian]

Quoting pictures

We used to be so good at editing out pictures and links to pictures when we replied to them. That is slipping away and it's not ok.

It's a safety issue.

Don't be a douche canoe.
Edit your replies out of consideration for the OP, please!

A good take and, nearly as importantly, an excellent use of douche canoe.

 

[mynameisben]

People excusing bad behavior by saying "It's just the internet" What the fuck does that matter? Internet or not doesn't mean it's okay to be an asshole.

Hmm... I wonder if Trump ever used that expression.

Ah, well. It doesn't matter. His assholiness never was in doubt.


Ben

 

[Cyber_Bella]

Creepy men that don’t take a hint. If you’ve quoted, interacted, or responded to a post and have received no responses back from her. Sorry fella, she’s just not into you.

 

[SassySheDevil]

I second this.

But at the same time. I'd rather know their true nature and the bottom line is if they do it online...they will do it offline too. Excuse makers can't be trusted.

Sorry you've been hurt.

Thankfully this one was regarding a Facebook group. But thank you.

 

[Diosax]

Sandwich posters

What is that

 

[Diosax]

Oh it's like you post in a Litster Above You thread, then I post, then you post, then someone posts, then yo7 post.... so you're always the person being answered upon.

That's an awful explanation but I hope it makes sense.

Ahh got it!! Makes sense

 

[mynameisben]

I think one issue there (the NAL threads) are the number of questions that focus on people's social relationships and private interactions -- i.e., which Litster do *you* talk with every day, who do *you* find sexy, etc. A lot of those wind up being circular, and presuppose that you have active social relationships with individuals on the forums, which not everyone does. One way to re-frame the exercise to encourage greater participation, especially by newcomers and infrequent posters, might to instead ask people to self-identify in response to certain questions and focus on more objective qualities , e.g. "I'm a Litster that . . . [has a pet turtle, hates to cook, has three arms, etc.]" So it's more like an ice-breaking exercise, rather than demonstrating your familiarity with other posters on Lit, which can make it seem more clubbish even if that's not the intent. Just a suggestion for those who may be interested - I myself am not looking to start any new threads at the moment.

This is soooo true, about the NAL threads. There's only 30 people who ever get named in those threads, and it's the same 30 names over and over again. If my name ever popped up in a NAL thread I think I would fall over dead. The only thing safegaurding my mortality there is that I no long bother to read those threads any more. There's only so much eye rolling I can take.


Ben

 

[LaisDeMarieDeFrance]

Oh it's like you post in a Litster Above You thread, then I post, then you post, then someone posts, then yo7 post.... so you're always the person being answered upon.

That's an awful explanation but I hope it makes sense.

Sometimes I find myself doing that and have to remind myself to stop so other people get a chance.