Lurking, Why Looked Down Upon By Tv Members?

[cm-happy]

This just a casual observation, but have noticed that occasionaly some one gets accused of "Lurking".

Why is this such a bad thing?

A step below of being accused of Trolling.

Don't we we all lurk when we read through the threads that interest us.

Or especially the OP's, do they not lurk about to see how their threads have been received

[Tywais]

From Wiki:

"lurker is a person who reads discussions on a message board, newsgroup, chatroom, file sharing or other interactive system, but rarely participates."

"The term dates back to the mid-1980s,

Because BBSs were often accessed by a single phone line (frequently in someone's home), there was an expectation that all who used a bulletin board would contribute to its content by uploading files and posting comments. Lurkers were viewed negatively, and might be barred from access by the sysop, if they did not contribute anything but kept the phone line tied up for extended periods.

Many Internet communities advise newbies to lurk for some time to get a feel for the specific culture and etiquette of the community, lest they make an inappropriate or redundant comment, ask a Frequently Asked Question, or incite a flame war. This leads to the tongue-in-cheek command to "lurk more". The verb to "de-lurk" means to start contributing actively to a community having been a lurker previously.

There are also some who lurk on a forum habitually, and rarely, if ever, contribute. It is generally difficult to guess how many such lurkers are present, due to their silence. In flame-wars, a participant who is losing an argument will sometimes claim to receive email support from lurkers. This inspired Jo Walton to write a filk on the subject entitled "The Lurkers Support Me in Email."

[endure]

There are also some who lurk on a forum habitually, and rarely, if ever, contribute. It is generally difficult to guess how many such lurkers are present, due to their silence.

At this moment there are 1296 guests viewing Thaivisa so we have at least that numbers of lurkers

[JetsetBkk]

At this moment there are 1296 guests viewing Thaivisa so we have at least that numbers of lurkers

Do you know what the time-window is on that. I mean, over what period of time were 1296 guests viewing? e.g. over the last 3 hours, the last 10 minutes, or at this very moment in time?

[Tywais]

At this moment there are 1296 guests viewing Thaivisa so we have at least that numbers of lurkers

Do you know what the time-window is on that. I mean, over what period of time were 1296 guests viewing? e.g. over the last 3 hours, the last 10 minutes, or at this very moment in time?

1595 user(s) active in the past 60 minutes

Active Users 1278 guests, 304 members, 13 anonymous members

[MeaMaximaCulpa]

I think lurkers are the backbone of the TV Forum. They are there, unobtrusive, and reading the ads.

I am one myself, but I do post occationally, if I feel I have something to say of any value (MY judgement).

Most people come here mainly to gather information, news or to be entertained. There are several "professional" TV "entertainers" or "news providers", we all know who they are, and they seem very eager to flog their stuff, so I do not think the rest of us should worry about the lurkers.

Just my two satangs worth.

[chiang mai]

One occasionally wishes that some posters would become lurkers instead!

[Ricardo]

I believe that most people have something to contribute, and wish they would gain the confidence to get started, as we would all benefit. But maybe lurking is a necessary precursor to contributing ? In which case - the sooner they start, the better.

There are still points-of-view which seem not to be represented here, for example the Southern Muslim view of the troubles there, but then this is still mainly a forum for farangs IMHO.

[chanchao]

I think lurkers are the backbone of the TV Forum. They are there, unobtrusive, and reading the ads.

You mean because they're lurkers they're unable to figure out what plug-in to get for Firefox, like all us smart non-lurkers?

[lazeeboy]

just lurking

[Scott]

There are a number of the business-economy related sites and also some of the visa sites that I lurk on. I do it because I am looking for information and believe me when I say I have nothing positive to contribute to those sites. Some of the folks there really know what their talking (or arguing) about--I hate to interput such information with something like "What's GDP mean?"

The visa sites I lurk in are to see what changes have occurred.

Otherwise, in most of the other forums I can't keep my fingers quiet!

[PeaceBlondie]

Like Scott, I can't keep my fingers quiet. Mama said the doctor must have vaccinated me with a phonograph needle.

There's much to be said for those who have nothing to say, but I can't think of what to say about them except that we appreciate having an audience, even with their sound of one hand clapping!

[v8tfcorty]

What does BBS stand for???

[Tywais]

What does BBS stand for???

Bulletin Board System - the early messaging system. Just like a local bulletin board where you stick up a post but electronically.

[MeaMaximaCulpa]

Chanchao,

I am getting a bit confused.

I am a lurker, but when I post, does my status change? And if so does it change back again, and when?

I use Firefox, does that make me a non-lurker? And a smart one? Or neither?

I also sometimes read the ads, does that make me non-smart...?

Please reply urgently!

Edit: Correcting typos (again!)

Edited December 11, 2007 by MeaMaximaCulpa

[polecat]

I've just noticed that although I've been a member for almost 4 years, I've only contributed a little over 200 posts. This is something like an average of 5 per month. This is mostly because I have very little to contribute other than cheap jokes and bare-faced insults.

What I want to know is, does this make me a lurker (the backbone of TV!) or just a particularly lame contributer. Can anyone claim to be a less valuable member of TV than me?

Edited December 11, 2007 by polecat

[PattayaParent]

Sometimes it's just a question of having something worthwhile to say.

I was a lurker on this baord for a couple of months just keeping abreast of news and views until one poster asked about finding a school for her 3 year old in Pattaya. As I'd just done all the legwork myself I signed in and posted what I hope was useful info on my experience.

Until then I had no reason to post.

I'm currently and active lurker on Ajarn but haven't felt the need to contribute there yet.

[kayo]

(snip for brevity)

There are several "professional" TV "entertainers" or "news providers", we all know who they are, and they seem very eager to flog their stuff, so I do not think the rest of us should worry about the lurkers.

Just my two satangs worth.

Don't quite understand

I've just noticed that although I've been a member for almost 4 years, I've only contributed a little over 200 posts. This is something like an average of 5 per month. This is mostly because I have very little to contribute other than cheap jokes (snip)

What I want to know is, does this make me a lurker (the backbone of TV!) or just a particularly lame contributer. Can anyone claim to be a less valuable member of TV than me?

I can!

Edited December 11, 2007 by kayo

[Sakeopete]

Lurking is good it gives noobs an overview of the forum. Not everone has somthing to contribute to every topic except ofc our usual suspect who like to add drival to keep their numers up.

[Ping]

Yer, I was an anon lurker for a long time before I bit the bullet and joined - mainly because there were often posts to which I wanted to add my 2 baht's worth but - not being a member - couldn't. As a lurker, I found the info interesting and many of the threads entertaining/informational. I also occasionally lurk at certain other Thai-related forums but haven't (so far) been sufficiently interested to join them. (And there are also some fairly ordinary ones out there.) No harm in lurking at all...

[smileplur]

I am a lurker! I post enough of my thoughts on other forums. It would be redundant to post the same information here. I come over here for more specific information that affects expats as opposed to travel. For example, I am here today to get the scoop on alcohol sales during the upcoming elections. I asked my question on the appropriate thread, and now that I am here, I am wandering around. I don't see the problem with that. Perhaps I will be more active here when I move to Thailand in May.

[JetsetBkk]

At this moment there are 1296 guests viewing Thaivisa so we have at least that numbers of lurkers

Do you know what the time-window is on that. I mean, over what period of time were 1296 guests viewing? e.g. over the last 3 hours, the last 10 minutes, or at this very moment in time?

1595 user(s) active in the past 60 minutes

Active Users 1278 guests, 304 members, 13 anonymous members

Ah, OK I found it - but that's only at the bottom of the main forum page. So I guess the "60 minutes" also applies to all the other pages (e.g. this one - "General Topics") that just give the numbers, but no time.

[JSixpack]

One occasionally wishes that some posters would become lurkers instead!

+1

[Jockstar]

Is a lurker what George Michael was ?

[joe1912]

Is a lurker what George Michael was ?

he was just trying to buy a cottage in the country

Edited December 13, 2007 by joe1912

[joe1912]

Does think first and speak later = a lurker

[camerata]

This just a casual observation, but have noticed that occasionaly some one gets accused of "Lurking".

Why is this such a bad thing?

I think some people feel that it is selfish to be a consumer of free information but never (or rarely) to contribute. On the other hand, in some forums there are very few experts and many people wanting the information. There will always be many times more lurkers than posters.

[Jingthing]

I never give a second thought to lurkers. Does that mean I look down on them?

[Ping]

I never give a second thought to lurkers. Does that mean I look down on them?

It depends. Does your 'farang and proud' signature mean you look down on non-farang?

[kayo]

I never give a second thought to lurkers. Does that mean I look down on them?

Depends.

What is worse:

Looking down on people,

Or not even considering them at all?