Originally posted by PVSAgreed. Or how about the infamous copy and paste tactic?
another tactic which has begun to dominate the GDF: making shit up (for lack of a more 'to the point' title......i cant think of anything to add to that. all i know is that i see it more and more, and not even distorting the facts or exagerating/dressing down, but rather just flatout lie after lie. once they are called out on it they usually just vanish from the thread with a last second flame for the last word, and then go on to post lies in other threads. .....................................................why? i mean ffs why?
Originally posted by PVSWell, you know when some random poster comes into a thread usually in the middle of a debate, and posts something from a page that agrees with them (usually a creationist website pointing out the "flaws" of evolution) expecting someone to answer and/or agree with them. I don't know why they do it. It would be like lil b posting a long list of things with opposites in that opposite thread, for no apparent reason. Or Deano posting some conspiracy text from a conspiracy website.
a bit vague. elaborate...
Disclaimer: I'm not saying those have happened, I'm just trying to explain what I mean by using the copy and paste tactic as a debating tactic.
Originally posted by lord xyz
Well, you know when some random poster comes into a thread usually in the middle of a debate, and posts something from a page that agrees with them (usually a creationist website pointing out the "flaws" of evolution) expecting someone to answer and/or agree with them. I don't know why they do it. It would be like lil b posting a long list of things with opposites in that opposite thread, for no apparent reason. Or Deano posting some conspiracy text from a conspiracy website.Disclaimer: I'm not saying those have happened, I'm just trying to explain what I mean by using the copy and paste tactic as a debating tactic.
i guess it depends. i mean, if their entire post consists of quotes, thats annoying, like if they're only way to argue a point is to paste someone else's argument and not actually contribute ...and as is the case with some, lack of credit to the person quoted. too many times i have seen certain members try to pass off someone else's words as theirs.
but if the text pasted is relevant to the discussion, as opposed to the "shock and awe" tactic of flooding the thread with quoted jibberish, i dont see whats wrong with it.