Must we have novel length cut and pastes?

I always think of a discussion forum as a place where things are discussed. It seems that when extremely long articles are cut and pasted into the discussion it defeats the whole purpose.

Perhaps a quick summary and a link to the article would be better. Quite frankly a lot of us may not have the time or desire to read extremely lengthy articles. Plus it sort of defeats the purpose of having a discussion. Long articles can quickly consume the discussion. If you post a long article and I happen to disagree, I could easily post another long article ad infinitum.

It would seem better if we just discussed the issue. Not that there isn't a place for short quotations or references, but these novel length quotations are a tad frustrating at least to me.

Of course I realize this is just my take on it.

For someone like me it's really tough, I usually just have to skip over the long posts. I have a very short reading concentration span, this is why I have to do most everything in e-books. I have even tried Focus Factor supplement for concentration, it did help some but not enough.While I do agree with you on the long cut and pastes, I surely would not want anyone not to be able to get their message out because of my disability.

... novel length quotations are a tad frustrating ...

... or grace-builders!

Thankfully no one is making us read them - like in school. While brief summaries may be preferred by most, it's sometimes nice to read the whole thing - being that summaries may merely be the poster's slant.

Diane

roadsign..Thankfully no one is making us read them - like in school.

Hi Diane-

I agree that articles in and of themselves are not bad-- in fact there is a place to put them under "Articles and Sermons."

What is frustrating is when a person tries to make some point by posting a 10,000 word thesis written by someone else. If you want to respond to the person, you are compelled to read the whole article. It just stifles the desire to interact. I would rather interact with another poster- not some author who has nothing to do with the conversation at hand.

I guess that quoting someone else's long work to support your point, seems, sort of, like a cop out.

TMK..
I guess that quoting someone else's long work to support your point, seems, sort of, like a cop out.

I admit, I browse quickly through long pasted articles if I’m not into that particular topic. But maybe someone else finds the info fascinating.

But let's cut some slack here: It takes a huge amount of work to study an in-depth article. It takes time to form a well-written summary; and it takes skill to apply it to the topic under discussion. Not everyone is up to that challenge.

Of course, these days we've become accustomed to simplified predigested morsels of information - or spouting off poorly informed opinions and ingrained presumptions.

I guess that quoting someone else's long work to support your point, seems, sort of, like a cop out. ….
Or like using another authors book to write your own book.

Consider a flip side: When I pick up a book, the first thing I do is look at the bibliography. This tells me a lot about the writer, how carefully he researches his topic and who has influenced his thinking. If nothing’s cited, maybe it’s fiction.

It's really hard to have a debate with what someone else wrote, when the original writer of the opinion is not here.

Diane

Diane wrote:

"Of course, these days we've become accustomed to simplified predigested morsels of information - or spouting off poorly informed opinions and ingrained presumptions."

true enough.

I personally like the fact that I might see a lengthy article on here of a topic that interests me - it is the same to me as someone recommending a sermon which might require 45 mins. - 1 hour to listen to. I fail to see what is the problem as you don't have to read it. It's nice to at least have an offering of some "meat" in this age we live in. Maybe though, I am missing the point here...

Links would probably be better, that way it don't wear out my scroll wheel on my mouse every two weeks. :) Could cutting and pasting someone work be a copyright violation? Or maybe Plagiarism.

All of the following are considered plagiarism:

Turning in someone else's work as your own.

Copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit.

Copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not.

Quote:
" I fail to see what is the problem as you don't have to read it. It's nice to at least have an offering of some "meat" in this age we live in. Maybe though, I am missing the point here..."

Again, long articles are fine in the right context- like in the "Articles and Sermons" section of the forum.

But when we are having a discussion about a certain issue, it is very distracting when very long and sometimes very technical excerpts from some third party's works are used to make an argument as opposed to the poster just stating what they think or believe. The person you are discussing with expects you to interact with the quoted article, not him or her, which of course would require that you read it. In fact I believe that sometimes a very long article is quoted in order to actually staunch further discussion, as if a person means to say "take that." I would rather interact with another poster as opposed to a quoted article. That's all.

Bear- I personally really like your posts, whether i happen to agree or not. That is because you plainly state what you believe and I have never thought that you have just "rambled on."

Ok, TMK, I think I get it now. You are not opposed to the long articles if they are put in the articles and sermons section. It is in the context of a discussion of a particular point that you don't want to have to read thru a lengthy article to respond to a person...I think I understand now. I couldn't for the life of me understand why you wouldn't want to see meaty articles on this site....thanks for the clarification.