Being completely honestly, I think Kyle Stedman is the only person in the world who has this many emotions towards sources. This article, “Annoying Ways People Use Sources,” is so hard to take seriously, because of how dramatic Stedman’s tone is and he’s so overly emotional invested that it makes me wonder if the whole thing is a joke. As a college student and an average civilian, I can’t relate to any of Stedman’s pet peeves, and he assumes everyone thinks how he does. One example of Stedman making this type of assumption is when he compares driving to writing standards. He suggests, “…writers can forget that their readers are sometimes just as annoyed at writing that fails to follow conventions as drivers are when stuck behind a car that fails to move over. In other words, there’s something similar between these two people: the knowledgeable driver who thinks, “I thought all drivers knew that the left lane is for the fastest cars,” and the reader who thinks, “I thought all writers knew that outside sources should be introduced, punctuated, and cited according to a set of standards”(Stedman 242-243). Stedman makes these types of comparisons throughout the entire article, and the only thing that comes to mind is, “No I don’t think that, and it doesn’t come close to comparison.” If anything, his article is a perfect example of how being overly emotional can ruin a paper by making the main topic a big joke.
Making Connections: “Toner’s response to the Obama video is like a diving board that Jessica bounces off of before she gets to the really interesting stuff: the pool (her own observations). A bunch of diving boards lined up without a pool (tons of quotes with no analysis) wouldn’t please anyone…”(Stedman 249).
As I first began this blog for my college english class, I was almost afraid that I was putting too much of my own ideas and too little quotations or references from the articles that we are required to analyze for our posts. As I read my peers work, I became even more concerned, because the majority of their blog posts consisted of ideas from the articles. Luckily, I was quite wrong. My professor later addressed how she wanted the class to direct their papers with their own thoughts and ideas, not to just repeat the entire article. As I read different papers, I realized how right Stedman is with his analogy of the diving boards. I would read a paper and get excited about all the quotes and information that my peer had pulled, and it was like they would line a dozen diving boards off, but they would only lead to a kiddy pool. Many papers had idea after idea from the article, but would only make a small comment of their own, then move on. This was frustrating, because I was more interested in their ideas, and I wouldn’t get enough.
In the article, “Annoying Ways People Use Sources,” Kyle Stedman states several of his frustrations around the area of sources and using the proper writing standards. Stedman claims how ineffectively siting sources can be harmful for your writings, because readers will get frustrated, confused, or not accept the supporting material. With each of Stedman’s topic areas, he compares what his annoyance is to an analogy or more common everyday annoyance. Stedman does this with the topics of dropping in quotations without introducing them, starting/ending a paragraph with a quotation, using too many quotations, failing to integrate a quotation with the grammar of the preceding sentence, incorrectly listing the works cited and dropping in a citation without making clear what information is from the source. After he discusses the annoyance, he also states how to fix the improper usage.