to expect people to read threads BEFORE they comment?

Well... they can complain, obviously, but the complaining would be unjustified.

And of course I've no idea why kitty posted that particular OP so my remarks are completely detached from any emotion that provoked her to write it. I think one has to allow for that.

"read" in my first post is red, not reed IYSWIM. I only read (past tense) about half a dozen posts at the beginning of this thread and then jumped in to answer the OP.

I do not think I have done anything wrong.

Well for example the David Beckham thread now has over 300 posts which is a bit of a slog to wade through if you want to add your two penny worth. But I don't know what the answer is.

I prefer the way Mumsnet highlights all of the OP's posts, it makes it so much easier to keep up without wading through hundreds of posts.

Ha ha!

There is a huge difference between a thread asking for a little support and, say, a political one.

Um, I don't find it that hard to find the op's later posts because they have a green bg. So do my own, though, which sometimes can confuse me for a minute. But Lona, do you mean the op's type should actually be in a colour? Good idea!

I don't think there is always a problem when someone posts without having read every comment. Their post might be a bit off if they've missed an update, of course. But if someone doesn't fully read a post that they are responding to, that's when I think their words might be hurtful. If the op says, for example, "Ds and I were so close, but dil has come between us," and a poster only reads "dil has come between us," they might reply, "You probably weren't close to ds before he met dil." That would hurt, I imagine, but be due to poor reading.

Don't have a green bg on my iPad!!

Re your last comment, kitty, yes, but a person has to know what an OP is on about which, with this thread, this person (me) hasn't a clue. I think I might now have gathered that you didn't like the responses on another thread. In my experience that (not liking responses on another thread) happens quite often. I don't see the point of starting another thread about one's disgruntledness which give no clue as to what it, the new thread, is about apart from disgruntledness about something somewhere else on the forums.

Pointless, or nearly so, is what I'm trying to say but didn't want to be too blunt initially.

I could have said something on the first thread bags but I didn't want it to become a bun fight as it could have been more upsetting. There were explanations of the position later in the thread which might have made people post differently (but possibly not!)

And it was only prompted by that thread, other people clearly thought the same as they knew where I was coming from. It is a general moan really.

But there is another one very similar running now - again it could be very hurtful.

It is not about disliking the replies as such - more the unhelpfulness.

Thanks, kitty.

It never occured to me to post on a thread without reading the OP and all the other comments (got too much time on my hands obviously). If you don't read the whole thread how do you know what's going on . From what I've seen, many threads deviate from the original OP that's why I tend to read them all first.

On my tablet the op's posts come up in green and any comments I make come up blue.

If a question is being asked then sometimes (depending on how many posts) I don't read everything everyone else has to say about it and just post my opinion. Nothing wrong with that. If others think they have "moved the thread on or changed it" then that's up to them.