Whereas the occasional use of c&p is a great way to support/augment an opinion in a debate, I find that the practice loses a good deal of power when it is used excessively and/or in lieu of a written personal opinion formed from reading said articles.
Some threads on this forum seem to be nothing but a debate between two opposing c&ps, a furious frenzy of lofty opinions written by others. You can scan such a thread for an actual word written by the forum members involved, and come up quite empty-handed.
This strikes me as lazy, for it is much easier to search and cut and paste than to form an opinion derived from reading off-site material then putting that opinion into words of one's own.
Then again, my dislike for cut-and-paste could well be only because I prefer to hear what other forum members think about current events, and to possibly follow a link to see what story has caused you to form such an opinion. For the news itself, I like to choose my own sources. In other words, I come to the forum for dialogue with other 'regular' people, and I read news sources for the news.
As I say, posting a link (as opposed to incessant cutting and pasting) to an article is good, but a forum can soon become not much more than a news service of sorts if it becomes too saturated with cut-and-pasted articles from other sources.
I think, too, that many people might hesitate before posting their view when they are up against, rather than a fellow forum member, the critical thinking and expertise of, say, a Globe & Mail or a BBC columnist. It would be akin to playing tennis against an Olympic gold medalist.
This, however, is merely an observation, and is in no way meant to suggest that cutting and pasting should be stopped. It I'd be curious to hear what others think, though. Do people like cut and paste? Do they prefer to be given a link to visit if and when they wish? Do others also prefer to read the actual views of forum members instead of articles from off-site?
Some threads on this forum seem to be nothing but a debate between two opposing c&ps, a furious frenzy of lofty opinions written by others. You can scan such a thread for an actual word written by the forum members involved, and come up quite empty-handed.
This strikes me as lazy, for it is much easier to search and cut and paste than to form an opinion derived from reading off-site material then putting that opinion into words of one's own.
Then again, my dislike for cut-and-paste could well be only because I prefer to hear what other forum members think about current events, and to possibly follow a link to see what story has caused you to form such an opinion. For the news itself, I like to choose my own sources. In other words, I come to the forum for dialogue with other 'regular' people, and I read news sources for the news.
As I say, posting a link (as opposed to incessant cutting and pasting) to an article is good, but a forum can soon become not much more than a news service of sorts if it becomes too saturated with cut-and-pasted articles from other sources.
I think, too, that many people might hesitate before posting their view when they are up against, rather than a fellow forum member, the critical thinking and expertise of, say, a Globe & Mail or a BBC columnist. It would be akin to playing tennis against an Olympic gold medalist.
This, however, is merely an observation, and is in no way meant to suggest that cutting and pasting should be stopped. It I'd be curious to hear what others think, though. Do people like cut and paste? Do they prefer to be given a link to visit if and when they wish? Do others also prefer to read the actual views of forum members instead of articles from off-site?