Bracketed comments no longer allowed in quotes?

[septimus]

I thought bracketing text was the way for the quoter to add text to a quote, and clearly denote it as written by the quoter, not quotee. No?
Is it necessary to clarify like the italicized note following?
“[bracketed text – comment by septimus]”

@Bone

The bracketed section in the first quote above was not in the original. This is a warning for altering text in the quote box.

[/moderating]

On a separate matter, I did not think that the rule against editing quoted text applied when the quotee is not an SDMB Member or Guest, especially when the quotee is an abstraction like “Dictionary,” and doubly especially when the quote is obviously intended to be humorous. Am I also wrong on this matter?

[GreysonCarlisle]

@The Rules

Quote Box – Do not modify another poster’s words inside the quote box. For SDMB posters, the quote must be accurate, whether displayed using <QUOTE> tags or ordinary quotation marks. Normal editorial rules apply: that is, you may indicate omitted portions of a quote by the use of ellipses “…” or devices such as [snip]. You may add text to clarify a word using square brackets (e.g., “her [the sister’s] friend”), but you may not add editorial comments or edit a quote so as to change the substantive meaning; nor may you substitute text such as “some blather” or “more nonsense” inside the <QUOTE> tags or quotation marks. We encourage accurate quoting of off-board individuals in a serious discussion; links are recommended. If it becomes apparent you’re derailing a discussion with fake or misleading quotes of off-board individuals, we reserve the right to take action. Unattributed parody quotes are permitted in all forums provided they don’t violate other SDMB rules. In the BBQ Pit forum only, parody quotes may be attributed to a parody username, provided that (a) the parody username is obviously satirical - we’ll be the judge of obviousness; and (b) no other rules are violated. Quotes attributed to parody usernames are not permitted in other forums.

I think the edit was made in good faith, but you might run up against the “but you may not add editorial comments” clause. Though that doesn’t seem to be what you were warned for.

[Colibri]

You failed to include your actual editing:

Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTech View Post
[snipped very long discussion, mostly built on the same misconception]…

Bolding mine.

Seems to me that was clearly editorializing, rather than simply a “snip.” You were characterizing the argument as being based on a misconception. Such a comment should have gone outside the quote box.

Here’s the relevant part of the rule:

@The Rules

you may not add editorial comments or edit a quote so as to change the substantive meaning; nor may you substitute text such as “some blather” or “more nonsense” inside the <QUOTE> tags or quotation marks.

[Colibri]

@septimus

On a separate matter, I did not think that the rule against editing quoted text applied when the quotee is not an SDMB Member or Guest, especially when the quotee is an abstraction like “Dictionary,” and doubly especially when the quote is obviously intended to be humorous. Am I also wrong on this matter?

The rule applies to other posters, not offboard individuals or sources. However, if you deliberately altered what a source said in order to misrepresent it, it could fall afoul of some other rule such as trolling or “being a jerk.” In general, if you are trying to be humorous you should make this clear.

[septimus]

@Colibri

The rule applies to other posters, not offboard individuals or sources. However, if you deliberately altered what a source said in order to misrepresent it, it could fall afoul of some other rule such as trolling or “being a jerk.” In general, if you are trying to be humorous you should make this clear.

Following is the post for which I was Noted for misquoting “Dictionary” — it’s from the same thread where I was Warned for another quote. Note that I did include a smiley-face. I wasn’t intending to “troll;” if I’m jerkish it’s not deliberate.

@septimus

Since you’re a Moderator you may be able to correct the typo in your post, despite missing the 5-minute window :

I do not believe it is possible to read my quote from “Dictionary” (which isn’t included when I click Quote) without realizing it is a misquote.

(BTW, do Moderators have the a nested-quote capability which Guests lack?)

[Irishman]

I would think the fake quote from the dictionary should be acceptable as an unattributed parody quote. I mean, it’s not like you linked an actual dictionary.

Bone’s warning is correct. You editorialized inside your brackets. That is specifically verboten.

[EllisDee]

@septimus

(BTW, do Moderators have the a nested-quote capability which Guests lack?)

Since this is ATMB…It’s not automatic, but anyone can do it manually. A bit tedious, and it gets confusing quickly, but it works. For example:

@Colibri

@septimus

On a separate matter, I did not think that the rule against editing quoted text applied when the quotee is not an SDMB Member or Guest, especially when the quotee is an abstraction like “Dictionary,” and doubly especially when the quote is obviously intended to be humorous. Am I also wrong on this matter?

The rule applies to other posters, not offboard individuals or sources. However, if you deliberately altered what a source said in order to misrepresent it, it could fall afoul of some other rule such as trolling or “being a jerk.” In general, if you are trying to be humorous you should make this clear.

EDIT: And since you can’t see quotes when you reply, here it is with noparse tags so you can see how I did it:

[noparse]

@Colibri

@septimus

On a separate matter, I did not think that the rule against editing quoted text applied when the quotee is not an SDMB Member or Guest, especially when the quotee is an abstraction like “Dictionary,” and doubly especially when the quote is obviously intended to be humorous. Am I also wrong on this matter?

The rule applies to other posters, not offboard individuals or sources. However, if you deliberately altered what a source said in order to misrepresent it, it could fall afoul of some other rule such as trolling or “being a jerk.” In general, if you are trying to be humorous you should make this clear.

[/noparse]

[BigT]

Yes, it is against the rules, but it almost never a Warnable offense, unless the poster has a history of such actions. It’s a very minor infraction, one that is easily corrected with a simple reminder, aka Mod Note.

It’s an esoteric rule whose violation in most cases causes no actual harm. A Warning seems too much for such.

[engineer_comp_geek]

@septimus

(BTW, do Moderators have the a nested-quote capability which Guests lack?)

No. We have the same editor that you do.