What is it with the long copy and pastes?????

by eddie Fri Sep 25, 2015 2:34 pm

For those of you guilty of this, I think you'll find that half (most?) of us DO NOT READ IT.

It puts me off! Just highlight a few points from your c&p maybe to make your point?

This isn't a rule break but it's a bloody bore, which is the only reason I'm mentioning it.
It's not cos I'm lazy, it's because most of us want a nutshell post, not a bloody manuscript.

It's a lazy way of debating and if people are just going to scroll past it, well, you're wasting your own time.

And don't get me started on people quoting the long c&p's with a long c&p of their own!

Good God. I want to stab my eyes with pencils.

by Ben Reilly Fri Sep 25, 2015 5:22 pm

I rarely read anything that's more than five paragraphs or so, and if I'm that interested I'll follow the link.

by nicko Fri Sep 25, 2015 5:31 pm

Ben, I agree, I can't be bothered to read the long C@P,s and I bet most others can't either!

by Raggamuffin Fri Sep 25, 2015 6:02 pm

I also agree. Those huge signatures used by a certain person are offputting as well and make the posts even longer.

by Guest Fri Sep 25, 2015 7:57 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:I also agree. Those huge signatures used by a certain person are offputting as well and make the posts even longer.

I can't imagine who you are referring to Raggs What is it with the long copy and pastes????? Ashame15

by Original Quill Fri Sep 25, 2015 8:10 pm

In defense of people who do paste long articles, I think it's because they know the issue. If you know the subject, it becomes easy to breeze through it.

But I do know that if I'm coming on a subject cold turkey, it's work, work, work...to plow through a long pre-printed piece. That's why, as the op, I like to go through it with a highlight or just the bold button, and hit the high points. Anyone who remembers university, knows what it is like to read with a yellow high-liter in your right hand.

by eddie Fri Sep 25, 2015 8:12 pm

Highlighters are used at schools in the UK too - hard to use a yellow highlighter on my iPad cyclops

by nicko Fri Sep 25, 2015 8:13 pm

With you, it would be with your cock in your right hand.Sorry could not resist that.

by eddie Fri Sep 25, 2015 8:15 pm

nicko wrote:With you, it would be with your cock in your right hand.Sorry could not resist that.

I don't have a cock scratch

by Guest Fri Sep 25, 2015 8:21 pm

Original Quill wrote:In defense of people who do paste long articles, I think it's because they know the issue. If you know the subject, it becomes easy to breeze through it.

But I do know that if I'm coming on a subject cold turkey, it's work, work, work...to plow through a long pre-printed piece. That's why, as the op, I like to go through it with a highlight or just the bold button, and hit the high points. Anyone who remembers university, knows what it is like to read with a yellow high-liter in your right hand.

Yes I remember very well reading for research purposes. This however
is not academia but a chat forum about news and assorted miscellany. The endless mindless c&p,deliberate posting of images to shock not to mention signatures that distort the forum do nothing but make for peeing up the back yard wall contents. It's boring and, as ultimately, none of you ever admit to being wrong or even acknowledge the opinions of another it's utterly pointless.

by Original Quill Fri Sep 25, 2015 8:39 pm

Well, I agree Nems. But the yellow highlighter places the burden on the original poster, who would have everyone else plow through the article. I'm saying, it's the least they can do if they are going to ask everyone else to read a lengthy piece.

It's very easy on a computer: see the many-colored button next to the font button? Or the 'B' for bold button? Just select the passage and push that button.

by Guest Fri Sep 25, 2015 8:46 pm

Original Quill wrote:Well, I agree Nems. But the yellow highlighter places the burden on the original poster, who would have everyone else plow through the article. I'm saying, it's the least they can do if they are going to ask everyone else to read a lengthy piece.

It's very easy on a computer: see the many-colored button next to the font button? Or the 'B' for bold button? Just select the passage and push that button.

Why should anything be highlighted ?! When you read a piece and highlight bits you highlight what YOU think is important. Who is to say what different things others may deem important. C&P is irritating and lazy.

by eddie Fri Sep 25, 2015 8:51 pm

I find it lazy too.
State your opinion and pull a couple of relevant sections out of your goggle search.

Debates should be heartfelt not entirely robotic.

Schools teach you to write your own essays; straight c&p's aren't allowed.

by Original Quill Fri Sep 25, 2015 8:54 pm

Nems wrote:
Original Quill wrote:Well, I agree Nems. But the yellow highlighter places the burden on the original poster, who would have everyone else plow through the article. I'm saying, it's the least they can do if they are going to ask everyone else to read a lengthy piece.

It's very easy on a computer: see the many-colored button next to the font button? Or the 'B' for bold button? Just select the passage and push that button.

Why should anything be highlighted ?! When you read a piece and highlight bits you highlight what YOU think is important. Who is to say what different things others may deem important. C&P is irritating and lazy.

Yeah. I see the point. If you highlight something, per force you are leaving something else out. Why not just write your own words and leave out the article.

Well, because the article says someone else is concerned. And s/he has said it before, and you want to give credit. So it's support and it's honesty. And if the author of the article is important enough, it's a little bit of publicity.

I see it both ways.

by Guest Fri Sep 25, 2015 8:57 pm

eddie wrote:I find it lazy too.
State your opinion and pull a couple of relevant sections out of your goggle search.

Debates should be heartfelt not entirely robotic.

Schools teach you to write your own essays; straight c&p's aren't allowed.

Exactly.
I find it really annoying that some people think cutting and pasting the words of another means they have won the argument or the debate and gives them the right to abuse.

by nicko Fri Sep 25, 2015 9:02 pm

EDDIE, it was a reply to something Quill said, mix up somewhere. [I don,t have much of one either]

by eddie Fri Sep 25, 2015 9:03 pm

It's fine to quote someone else and back your argument, if that's what you need to make your own argument.....

But!

We don't need three years worth of their work to read!

by Original Quill Fri Sep 25, 2015 9:03 pm

Nems wrote:
eddie wrote:I find it lazy too.
State your opinion and pull a couple of relevant sections out of your goggle search.

Debates should be heartfelt not entirely robotic.

Schools teach you to write your own essays; straight c&p's aren't allowed.

Exactly.
I find it really annoying that some people think cutting and pasting the words of another means they have won the argument or the debate and gives them the right to abuse.

I understand that.

But people often say I write long posts, and they don't want to read it. So, those are my original words, and the problem is still there (lol...assuming it isn't me).

I think it boils down the people not wanting to invest in the work and time it takes to have complex discussions. Short, pithy posts are all they want.

by eddie Fri Sep 25, 2015 9:35 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Nems wrote:
eddie wrote:I find it lazy too.
State your opinion and pull a couple of relevant sections out of your goggle search.

Debates should be heartfelt not entirely robotic.

Schools teach you to write your own essays; straight c&p's aren't allowed.

Exactly.
I find it really annoying that some people think cutting and pasting the words of another means they have won the argument or the debate and gives them the right to abuse.

I understand that.

But people often say I write long posts, and they don't want to read it. So, those are my original words, and the problem is still there (lol...assuming it isn't me).

I think it boils down the people not wanting to invest in the work and time it takes to have complex discussions. Short, pithy posts are all they want.

I'm one of the people who doesn't like SOME of your posts; they're condescending and patronising; I wouldn't read anyone's post who started off speaking to me like that.

Don't take it personal.

by Original Quill Sat Sep 26, 2015 7:20 am

eddie wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

I understand that.

But people often say I write long posts, and they don't want to read it. So, those are my original words, and the problem is still there (lol...assuming it isn't me).

I think it boils down the people not wanting to invest in the work and time it takes to have complex discussions. Short, pithy posts are all they want.

I'm one of the people who doesn't like SOME of your posts; they're condescending and patronising; I wouldn't read anyone's post who started off speaking to me like that.

Don't take it personal.

I don't. I relate it to the other thread, in the Europe section. You're angry with me today, and I understand that. But as I've said there...I don't need your love, but I want your intensity. That I have.

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:26 am

Raggamuffin wrote:I also agree. Those huge signatures used by a certain person are offputting as well and make the posts even longer.

Thank the Lord we can block them though eh Laughing

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:45 am

eddie wrote:For those of you guilty of this, I think you'll find that half (most?) of us DO NOT READ IT.

It puts me off! Just highlight a few points from your c&p maybe to make your point?

This isn't a rule break but it's a bloody bore, which is the only reason I'm mentioning it.
It's not cos I'm lazy, it's because most of us want a nutshell post, not a bloody manuscript.

It's a lazy way of debating and if people are just going to scroll past it, well, you're wasting your own time.

And don't get me started on people quoting the long c&p's with a long c&p of their own!

Good God. I want to stab my eyes with pencils.

lol i agree and never read long copy and paste its boring lol!

by eddie Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:51 am

Original Quill wrote:
eddie wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

I understand that.

But people often say I write long posts, and they don't want to read it. So, those are my original words, and the problem is still there (lol...assuming it isn't me).

I think it boils down the people not wanting to invest in the work and time it takes to have complex discussions. Short, pithy posts are all they want.

I'm one of the people who doesn't like SOME of your posts; they're condescending and patronising; I wouldn't read anyone's post who started off speaking to me like that.

Don't take it personal.

I don't. I relate it to the other thread, in the Europe section. You're angry with me today, and I understand that. But as I've said there...I don't need your love, but I want your intensity. That I have.

You got intensity, I'm always intense when I believe something.
You didn't like my intensity Quill, you wanted me to "resign" and got very antsy and childish.

Truth is, I don't think you're great with intensity and I bet that's not the first time you've been told that.

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:52 am

The fact is whether a link is posted or part of the link or all of the link, most people will simply not read them and educate themselves. This is the same ones who moan about them.
That is their own failing at the end of the day as most is posted to support points in a debate. So where people claim they do not read it if its too long, the majoirty do not read the link anyway.
Its basically a load of fuss over nothing of which this thread is. Nothing more than a whinge.
So let people moan and whinge if that makes them feel good about themselves.

by eddie Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:02 am

Yes this thread is a whinge. Never said it wasn't?

Seems we all like one though! Lots of replies cheers

Ps long c&ps are still mindnumbingly booooring Sleep

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:04 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:I rarely read anything that's more than five paragraphs or so, and if I'm that interested I'll follow the link.

reading taxes you does it??

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:06 am

Original Quill wrote:In defense of people who do paste long articles, I think it's because they know the issue. If you know the subject, it becomes easy to breeze through it.

But I do know that if I'm coming on a subject cold turkey, it's work, work, work...to plow through a long pre-printed piece. That's why, as the op, I like to go through it with a highlight or just the bold button, and hit the high points. Anyone who remembers university, knows what it is like to read with a yellow high-liter in your right hand.

youre one of the worst offenders

to be fair though you dont post long copy and paste jobs

you just post long winded boring waffle jobs

by eddie Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:08 am

Look let's face it, if you were sat in your house and had friends round for dinner, and you were all having a mature, friendly debate and you got a book out to make your point, and proceeded to read out long passages of text.......

This would be your dinner party:

Shocked

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:13 am

eddie wrote:Look let's face it, if you were sat in your house and had friends round for dinner, and you were all having a mature, friendly debate and you got a book out to make your point, and proceeded to read out long passages of text.......

This would be your dinner party:

good thing quill is billy nomates

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:13 am

But we are not at a dinner party, we are on a forum, where you can use supporting evidence.

Take this thread which proves my point on posters not reading links.

Smelly makes a claim on Peter Thatchell and is going off what is stated on a BNP site claims is made from a letter he wrote in 1997. Now if smelly had bothered to open the link, he would see that Peter Thatchell address this very letter.

Smelly may very well be right in his conclusions of Peter Thatchell, but I have certainly proved my point that clearly if people do not read a link relevant to claims being made, then clearly sometimes that article does not to be posted up in full.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t11681p100-peado-claims-pedophilia-is-a-sexual-orientation#229526

To be honest I sometimes post full articles other times I do not and if people do not like it, well tough. Its there to educate and if people do not wish to educate themselves, that is up to them

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:15 am

he wrote the letter and those are his words walter. addressing it after the fact changes nothing

by eddie Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:16 am

Links are fine - we can go, at our leisure and skim read or pick out points we feel are relevant.

This is about long c&ps

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:19 am

smelly-bandit wrote:he wrote the letter and those are his words walter. addressing it after the fact changes nothing

I am really not that interested to be honest, as one gay man who advocates lowering the age does not equate all Homosexuals culpable to this view, so on that aspect its very much a dumb point from you.
My main point was the fact I presented a link which Thatchell claims the BNP omit the full letter and its context, which I knew you would not bother to open and read.
That was the point I was proving. If you think he is a nonce, you may well have a case.
As I say I just proved why sometimes it is relevant to post most of an article if it is relevant.

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:21 am

eddie wrote:Links are fine - we can go, at our leisure and skim read or pick out points we feel are relevant.

This is about long c&ps

But as seen people do not read relevant links to a debate.
Was just making a point and as seen it was well founded.
Anyway, you can carry on moaning now, as at the end of the day its up to posters what they post.

lol!

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:24 am

yeah youre suddenly "not interested" because you realised you defended a man without having all the details about who he is and what he is and as it tuns out he is a peadophile

and no walter i didnt take that from the BNP website, there are dozens of sites that have the contents of the letter.

if you seem to think there is something more to the letter then you are lying, becasue i have seen the screen shot of the actual letter in the paper

by eddie Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:26 am

Cuchulain wrote:
eddie wrote:Links are fine - we can go, at our leisure and skim read or pick out points we feel are relevant.

This is about long c&ps

But as seen people do not read relevant links to a debate.
Was just making a point and as seen it was well founded.
Anyway, you can carry on moaning now, as at the end of the day its up to posters what they post.

I'm not going shopping today so I may stay on here and moan all day Razz

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:27 am

smelly-bandit wrote:yeah youre suddenly "not interested" because you realised you defended a man without having all the details about who he is and what he is and as it tuns out he is a peadophile

and no walter i didnt take that from the BNP website, there are dozens of sites that have the contents of the letter.

if you seem to think there is something more to the letter then you are lying, becasue i have seen the screen shot of the actual letter in the paper

Show me anywhere that I dfended him?
I just posted up his views.
Like I said the full letter is actually on his link and I know why you could not post the full letter as you got your edited version from the BNP website.
All of which is irrelevant to that debate.
You are bringing up the views of one homosexual after claiming homosexuality has nothing to do with the debate.
Like I say you tie yourself up in knots

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:28 am

eddie wrote:
Cuchulain wrote:

But as seen people do not read relevant links to a debate.
Was just making a point and as seen it was well founded.
Anyway, you can carry on moaning now, as at the end of the day its up to posters what they post.

I'm not going shopping today so I may stay on here and moan all day

Why change the habbit of a life time.

lol!

by eddie Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:28 am

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:29 am

well walter since this very thread is about links and C&P's

please do me the favour of posting the link Smile

, if you are accusing me of using an edited version the please by all means post the link to the full version

come on then

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 10:32 am

smelly-bandit wrote:well walter since this very thread is about links and C&P's

please do me the favour of posting the link , if you are accusing me of using an edited version the please by all means post the link to the full version

come on then

Its not me acussing but Thatchell, so go on his link which it goes into detail on.
I never claimed to have the guardian link, but you certainly do not, so how can anyone say what is the truth here without this link.
Its you making the claims without a link.
I just posted up his claim to rebuke what others have claimed
You really failed to understand onus don't you. lol
I did state you may well be right, which is why I posted his link

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 12:18 pm

believe what you want walter

how many times do i have to tell you that i dont care what you think or dont think

im not trying to convince YOU of anything

all i am doing is making MY points, if you wish to disagree then do so.

disagree till youre blue in the face, it wont change a single thing

besides you have already conceded that i was right about tatchell (or will you deny that now??)

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 12:36 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Nems wrote:

Exactly.
I find it really annoying that some people think cutting and pasting the words of another means they have won the argument or the debate and gives them the right to abuse.

I understand that.

But people often say I write long posts, and they don't want to read it. So, those are my original words, and the problem is still there (lol...assuming it isn't me).

I think it boils down the people not wanting to invest in the work and time it takes to have complex discussions. Short, pithy posts are all they want.

That is certainly true too. Some posters have busy lives and only log on for a short while, having to wade through great long posts means it feels like you never catch up. Of course I understand that forums are a very big part of some posters worlds and being right is vital to them, but that shouldn't allow them to ruin it for others

by Guest Sat Sep 26, 2015 1:27 pm

smelly-bandit wrote:believe what you want walter

how many times do i have to tell you that i dont care what you think or dont think

im not trying to convince YOU of anything

all i am doing is making MY points, if you wish to disagree then do so.

disagree till youre blue in the face, it wont change a single thing

besides you have already conceded that i was right about tatchell (or will you deny that now??)

I said if you were right I would concede, which as seen it was you being a complete idiot again
Contradiction also, if you did not care what I wrote you would not respond to them.
It shows twice today I made you look a complete dick and also that people do not bother to read crucial supporting evidence from a link.
So if it bothers others, well that is tough luck basically.
If people bothered to read links, and thus saved countless further irrelevant posts, there would be no need to post most of an article.

by Original Quill Sat Sep 26, 2015 4:31 pm

eddie wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

I don't. I relate it to the other thread, in the Europe section. You're angry with me today, and I understand that. But as I've said there...I don't need your love, but I want your intensity. That I have.

You got intensity, I'm always intense when I believe something.
You didn't like my intensity Quill, you wanted me to "resign" and got very antsy and childish.

Truth is, I don't think you're great with intensity and I bet that's not the first time you've been told that.

But you answered.

by Original Quill Sat Sep 26, 2015 4:40 pm

Nems wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

I understand that.

But people often say I write long posts, and they don't want to read it. So, those are my original words, and the problem is still there (lol...assuming it isn't me).

I think it boils down the people not wanting to invest in the work and time it takes to have complex discussions. Short, pithy posts are all they want.

That is certainly true too. Some posters have busy lives and only log on for a short while, having to wade through great long posts means it feels like you never catch up. Of course I understand that forums are a very big part of some posters worlds and being right is vital to them, but that shouldn't allow them to ruin it for others

Xactly. A forum is kinda like a library. If you just drop in, you can go the newspaper section and get a quick read on the News. Or, you may come in to read a Dickens story or gibbon's Decline and Fall. There's something for everyone.

by eddie Sat Sep 26, 2015 6:39 pm

Original Quill wrote:
eddie wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

I don't. I relate it to the other thread, in the Europe section. You're angry with me today, and I understand that. But as I've said there...I don't need your love, but I want your intensity. That I have.

You got intensity, I'm always intense when I believe something.
You didn't like my intensity Quill, you wanted me to "resign" and got very antsy and childish.

Truth is, I don't think you're great with intensity and I bet that's not the first time you've been told that.

But you answered.

Course I did? It's a debate forum!

scratch

by Original Quill Sat Sep 26, 2015 6:51 pm

eddie wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

But you answered.

Course I did? It's a debate forum!

What is it with the long copy and pastes????? EfQRDND

by eddie Sat Sep 26, 2015 6:54 pm

That is freaky!!! Shocked

by Original Quill Sat Sep 26, 2015 6:55 pm

eddie wrote:That is freaky!!!

I know. I couldn't watch it for very long or I'd get dizzy.

by Sponsored content