So what do you guys think about C&P arguing around here? I’ve seen people call a variety of things C&P, so I’ll explain my definition as I understand it.
A response is made in typical paragraph fashion. A contrasting view point is argued against this by copying and pasting the entire thread (or frequently just parts taken out of context) and then quoting it out and making one line retorts to each sentence, phrase, or part of a complete thought.
To me this is completely useless, and making arguements in a non-linear, and non-cohesive fashion which really makes little effort to form a complete position. Not only does it seem to make virtually any point of view and well formed arguement susceptable to twisting, and complete obfuscation. It also leaves the poster with nothing to retort, except useless one line snipets that can’t be strung together to create a position of opposition.
Its like guerrila warfare, it can’t be confronted. But, what does that solve here?