is the usage of "nt" in the body of the message really necessary?

[StopTheMorans]

I mean; isn't it obvious that there is "no text" if you don't type anything in the body of the message except for "nt" (and then there is text in the body of the message)? If you've said all you need to say in the subject; why the need to type "nt" in the body when it's obvious that there is no text in the message? these are the things that keep me from getting 8 hours of sleep every night...

on edit: added text to clarify that I was referring to "nt" in the body of the message rather than the subject...

[ScreamingMeemie]

1. If it's typed in the subject line, it's a good thing and saves the time

of clicking on a response. If it's in the body, it's a waste, I agree.

[Feathered Fish]

2. I uesd to use it all the time

just a case of politness so people wouldn't have to expand whatever thread. But now I never use it, it's completely unnecessary.

[NoPasaran]

3. Not really n/t

[StopTheMorans]

5. smartass

:P

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

15. I disagree!

n/t

[raggedcompany]

4. as it was explained to me, yes it is necessary

because dial-up users cannot spend the time loading a big thread with every reply expanded. the n/t helps them to see which posts NOT to click, because the time it would take to load the empty post is pretty frustrating

[freeplessinseattle]

8. yep, dial-up user here (nt)

[Phillycat]

11. He said in the BODY of the text.

Meaning in the "message" portion of the text. Which is soooooo stupid. The subject line, yeah, it's great.

[raggedcompany]

12. agreed. good in subject, bad in body n/t

[gaia_gardener]

6. If you have a very provocative

subject line but no message - well it would be nice to have nt. For those of us that don't "display all", we end up clicking to open a post and then finding nothing there (which adds to the cost for DU). It isn't a huge deal for me because I'm on cable modem, but for our dial-up friends it can be a real pain.

[freeplessinseattle]

7. it helps in longer threads when you don't want to "view all" and be

selective. personally it seems a waste of time to click on a response and there is nothing more, but then again how much time do I waste here anyway, lol.

[sam sarrha]

9. Learn to meditate.. the little things just fall away, it is rough being a

control freak..little things get heavy and they rarely have any handles

[StopTheMorans]

10. no thanks, i don't get into that hippie crap

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :P

[freeplessinseattle]

13. hey, hippies can be control freaks, too! :) (nt)

[StopTheMorans]

14. i know, i just love to make fun of hippies!

[neoteric lefty]

16. For those who don't like to "expand all" on large threads, maybe

those fine folks who run DU (I think his name is Jesus...j/k) could develop a little script that would automatically append a 'n/t' at the end of a subject line if the MESSAGE part of the form remains empty. Seems like a pretty simple bit of programming that would add very little to overhead. Just an idea.

[Neoma]

17. .

[StopTheMorans]

19. thanks for ruining my next thread :(

i was going to post that as another thread; eom makes even worse sense because it actually adds an "end of message" to the end of the message.

[Neoma]

22. ok i'll edit my post and you edit mine so you can start this in a thread

[StopTheMorans]

23. don't worry about it; i waste enough bandwidth as it is

:)

[RUDUing2]

18. it is on some sites..

I use one where you can not leave the message box blank or it wont post it...

[Zenaholic]

20. Thanks! I always wondered what n/t meant. (n/t)

[asthmaticeog]

21. Sometimes it is necessary.

Can you really be sure there's no text just by looking? For example, one could be using white text. I could be calling you an obsessive pedant, or at the very least a tiresome nitpicker, and you'd never know. There can be a world of difference between an apparently blank message body and an n/t post.