Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10
Saden, an off topic item, but why do you put so many links in when you're making a point? I don't even click on 10% of them. I'd rather you just make your point on your own.
Criticism police.
|
I provide links to support my argument and to give context to my posts when possible. Honestly though, linking takes some effort and it's much easier to just write a post and be done without having to explain yourself. Clicking is obviously optional but for further detail as to why I link you should read
Frank Rich piece or you can just read the quote below seeing how you don't like linking :p
Quote:
Rich says his linking is as much about backing up his argument as it is about adding background. If one’s argument is only as good as one’s facts, Rich sends you to his facts. “Now, sometimes it’s unlinkable material,” he says. “But why not give the reader, if he or she wants to, the opportunity to see the sources, or a source, when it’s available? It helps bulletproof the column, because if they say ‘He must be making that up,’ they can look and see — here’s the source, take a look and judge it for yourself….If I’m citing a figure, at the most banal level, from the Labor Department or a poll or an economic report, [why not] link to the whole document it comes from?”
...
Rich says he does see the links as optional added value. “To me as a writer, the most important thing is to have the column stand alone,” he told me. “Believe it or not, there are still a lot of readers who still read the column on paper.” Linking, he says, is “extracurricular activity for those who want it and have the time to indulge in it.”
|
p.s. I of course was doing it big way before Frank Rich.