A ban on Cut & Paste Odesseys?

[Idaho]

Can we institute some kind of forum rule on tedious c&p threads. There does seem to be a few prime culprits. And the content is always along the same monotonous track.

Certain posters seem to think that it is intellectually robust to c&p whatever dirge they happen to swallow and present it as evidence to the rest of us. Even worse is the multi c&p - one borderline reasonable source combined with several wacked out ones.

Perhaps a simple rule. Post up the link to your drivel with at most a paragraph synopsis. Even better - make the point yourself (if you have the wit). It's a drag having to wade through endless threads which in effect are just reading one paragraph of some ongoing boreathon before scrolling past acres of text in the vain hope of original commentary beneath it.

I think the urge to paste all of it up is part of a realisation that no rational member here would, quite reasonably, ever visit such sites and that they feel the need to 'spread the word'.

I come on this board for some debate, some original ideas - hell even some unorginal ones - but at least make them your own. I have no interest in reading a bunch of opinion articles cut from sources I wouldn't touch with a bargepole. Sources who's legitimacy seems to come from the fact that no-one else would either.

[R'as al Ghul]

Absolutely true.

I would like to add that the old "I link - you link" game is also pretty tiresome.
I mean the habit that posters are asked to provide links to backup their opinions and
when they do so that the sources always get debunked for being biased.
This most often ends in link battles where links are posted that say the exact opposite of the link before.

[rasoforos]

I have been copy pasting articles but I mostly provide only a link.

As long as the article is small enough and not dogmatic or patronising then I think its ok, I can never be bothered to read 5 pages of text though and when ppl start disecting and quoting it it gets too tedious.

I hope the oddly enough articles I occasionaly post do not cause too much trouble.

[monkian]

You wouldnt happen to be talking about a certain poster would you ?

*cough* Gawain *cough*

[Papewaio]

What you would prefer unproven dribble rather then referenced dribble that is upfront and has the ability to be disected?

I thought that a good mix is what stops it just being a set of nominative statements.

[Idaho]

The problem is not really about referenced articles, or indeed conversation pieces. The problem is certain users simply posting opinion pieces that agree with their opinion as opposed to being able to articulate the point themselves.

[Big_John]

being able to actually articulate a position rather than simply regurgitating some internet editorial is a virtue for which we should all strive. but it shouldn't be necessary to make a post.

tbh, i usually just ignore that boring drivel.

it would be rather funny, though, to see someone run off a string of responses in a debat-ish backroom thread that consisted entirely of quoted text from some website.

[Goofball]

Can we institute some kind of forum rule on tedious c&p threads. There does seem to be a few prime culprits. And the content is always along the same monotonous track.

I have to tell you Idaho, though I quite often agree with you I think you are way off base with this idea.

If you don't like cut and pastes, don't read them and don't reply to them. Just like in the real world, it's your responsibility to sift through what you see in the Backroom, then decide what to keep and what to discard.

[Idaho]

Goofball, Gawain - the 'if you don't like it then ignore it' arguement doesn't wash here. It's like me complaining about litter, or anti-social behaviour and being told to simply look the other way.

We all have a responsibility to maintain the level of debate on this forum, to promote a good standard all round. Yeah Gawain's views p*ss me off - but I will just have to deal with that - however cluttering up the board with endless C&Ps means that this forum is turning into a reactionary essay list. If I wanted to see a page filled with such dirge I would hold my nose and go and find www.lickmystarsandstripesgunbutt.com

Link to such sites to provide a source - fine

Post the occassional article from such site - if pertinent and interesting - fine

Refer to such sites - fine

However don't fill the board with endless C&Ps - it's not a big point. If you really have something to say about something then say it yourself. Don't bore me articles I don't want to read by people who I can't debate with.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Link to such sites to provide a source - fine

I hate when people do that. I t makes it harder to refference and reply. In many cases I do what others say about cut and paste and just dont bother even reading it and wait for people to start replying. In the opening of the thread I would much rather see the entire article. Different strokes for different folks.

We all have a responsibility to maintain the level of debate on this forum,

And now you are the one to decide these standards?

Goofball, Gawain - the 'if you don't like it then ignore it' arguement doesn't wash here. It's like me complaining about litter, or anti-social behaviour and being told to simply look the other way.

One mans litter is another mans gold.

however cluttering up the board with endless C&Ps means that this forum is turning into a reactionary essay list. If I wanted to see a page filled with such dirge I would hold my nose and go and find www.lickmystarsandstripesgunbutt.com

I dont clutter up the board with endless cut and pastes. Mostly I ony use them to open a thread. Lets talk reaility here.

Don't bore me articles I don't want to read by people who I can't debate with.

You see in the end its all about Idaho

[Redleg]

You see in the end its all about Idaho

Sure it is - didn't you notice it in his very first post.

...... I have no interest in reading a bunch of opinion articles cut from sources I wouldn't touch with a bargepole........

Cut and paste is just fine as long as it does not violate any copyright laws.

I would like to see more detailed thoughts of individuals after the initial article. And like someone mentioned some articles come from sites where other's subscribe to - and other do not. So the only way to have others see the article is to actually cut and paste it.

The only valid concern about cut and paste - is are we in our ignorance violating any copy right laws that will get the .Org in trouble with whatever regulatory outfit decides to eventual police the internet for such violations.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I'll just copy this from another post of mine since it belongs here:

About those 'cut and paste odyssey's': if you are trying to make a point, then make it and just add a link. If you've got an interesting article to share that you want to discuss, by all means share it.

My two cents.

[Demon of Light]

Yes GodsPetMonkey: some guys like to get a rise out of other people. And they do it while hiding in the shadows, covered by an alter ego account, or by just being dishonest about their own play.

The sad thing is that those arsonist are not only rewarded by flames, but also enjoy sympathy and their saint alter egos also get respect. Unlike real man/woman who do good and bad things and receive feedback, these trolls get away with everything.

I can't speak for anyone except myself (though I hope that most people agree with me) BUT I don't find anything inherently inflammatory in what Gawain does. If he finds something on the internet that he wants to share, so be it. His intent is to inspire intelligent, rational debate. Anyone saying otherwise, even if it is based on the end result of a specific thread that went to hell, is guilty of casting aspersions on Gawain's character and motives. What bothers me about this is that alot of people seem use as their primary motivation for wishing to ban such threads this image of the knuckle-dragging ideologue out to club people to death (or agreement) with insidious articles culled from the nether-reaches of the dark and dastardly recesses of Ann Coulter's soul. If one were to respond intelligently to these articles, that might set the tone of discussion. We apply this logic already to normal posts. I don't see a reason we cannot do so here.

Also: The last two posts deal with a sort of person that I have no doubt exists. This person is spoken of in general terms. It is my hope (and insofar as I have faith in the posters, my assumption) that there aren't any subtle accusations being made. Correct?

[Ghost of Rom]

Hmmm...thought liberals were big on free speech and such...

[TosaInu]

Gawain..

..It is my hope (and insofar as I have faith in the posters, my assumption) that there aren't any subtle accusations being made. Correct?

Adding 1 and 2 in your post, no I don't accuse Gawain. I do know though that such people exist. I will celebrate the day they discover how fun it is to play with Barbie & Ken and devote the rest of their life to groom her hair.

[Adrian II]

I do know though that such people exist.

I don't get it either, TosaInu. Are some people using multiple accounts in order to troll the .org and is this your way of saying that you are on to them? If so, I hope you will be successful.

[Proletariat]

Come to think of it... Has anyone ever seen TosaInu and Gawain at the same time?

Hm.

[Productivity]

No I'm Spartacus?

[Adrian II]

Come to think of it... Has anyone ever seen TosaInu and Gawain at the same time?

Hm.

How about you and Byzantine Prince? Hm?

[Big_John]

no comment.