How many posts in a thread should I read?

I love Sean nos

I received a card and a thread ban for supposedly ignoring a mod warning. There was no mention of a warning in the thread title. The post that I responded to was post 31 and was on page 3 according to my browser/boards settings. My post was post 241 and is on page 17.

How many posts in a thread is a user meant to read before responding?

I asked the mod in question, but there's been no answer yet.

Beasty

OP, I presume you are referring to the yellow card you received in AH on 29 August.

I have just looked through the complete thread (which runes to 242 posts plus a few more that were deleted). Looking at the sequence of events

Post 228 - An Admin steps in to instruct everyone to get back on topic and stop making personal comments

After post 239 you made your first "contribution" which was to say you had read through indicating you were having a laugh at the OP's expense

The mod deleted that post, but could equally have carded you for the personal comments regardless of the prior Admin warning (which was only 11 posts before your own). However even despite that prior Admin warning the Mod chose to take no further action.

Then the mod issued an instruction not to bring stuff from other forums into the discussion. The very next post you decided to have another pop at the OP and received a yellow card and thread ban for it

This complaint is nothing to do with how many posts you should have read - the instructions of both mod and Admin were very clear and within a few posts of the one you received a yellow card on (and the warning was issued over an hour before your own follow-up). You had a clear warning in the post immediately before the one you made, and knew your prior post had already been deleted by the mod. The yellow card was in my view warranted regardless of those in-thread warnings

I love Sean nos

Beasty wrote: »

OP, I presume you are referring to the yellow card you received in AH on 29 August.

I am, but I'm not disputing it.

Beasty wrote: »

After post 239 you made your first "contribution" which was to say you had read through indicating you were having a laugh at the OP's expense

So what? Is finding a thread funny against the charter now?

Beasty wrote: »

The mod deleted that post, but could equally have carded you for the personal comments regardless of the prior Admin warning

I don't recall any personal comments, but since the post was deleted, I'll take your word for it.

Beasty wrote: »

Then the mod issued an instruction not to bring stuff from other forums into the discussion. The very next post you decided to have another pop at the OP and received a yellow card and thread ban for it

The post from the OP I quoted was from the same thread. Therefore this warning should not have applied to my post. However, I'm still not disputing it.

Beasty wrote: »

This complaint is nothing to do with how many posts you should have read

It very much is. I'm not disputing the card. I am asking, again, how many posts in a thread am I expected to read before I can post?

Beasty

I love Sean nos wrote: »

It very much is. I'm not disputing the card. I am asking, again, how many posts in a thread am I expected to read before I can post?

Familiarise yourself with the thread, familiarise yourself with the forum. Certainly be on the lookout for recent mod warnings as well as any that may be referred to in the thread title and/or OP. How many posts does that translate to? - clearly it depends on how familiar it has made you with what has already gone on. In this case the warnings were within 15 posts of your "offending" post and no real excuse

I love Sean nos

Beasty wrote: »

Familiarise yourself with the thread, familiarise yourself with the forum. Certainly be on the lookout for recent mod warnings as well as any that may be referred to in the thread title and/or OP. How many posts does that translate to? - clearly it depends on how familiar it has made you with what has already gone on. In this case the warnings were within 15 posts of your "offending" post and no real excuse

*Sigh*
So the answer is essentially that Boards expects that users read all of the thread, no matter what length it is, before responding. If you don't, Boards may sneak in a warning and then penalise you for it. Indeed, they may even use warnings that should not apply to you as a user and continue to reference them in future, even after it has been made that they shouldn't have applied.

Beasty

The answer is show some common sense when posting and you should be fine. There are plenty of posters who have posted many thousands of posts across the site over many years without the merest hint of a card or ban.

I've highlighted how you could have shown a bit more common sense in the specific thread you are referring to and if anyone thinks their card or ban is "unfair" they can always appeal it via the DRP. I am sure that if a specific warning was hidden away in the way you suggest that would be recognised within the DRP, but equally in many cases cards or bans are warranted regardless of in-thread warnings, and I would suggest that is the case with the specific card you are referring to here.