Clarification request, re: Rules about changing text within quote tags

[Ranger_Jeff]

Okay, I understand.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Good resolution.

[Shodan]

Very reasonable. Feel free to cite this the next time I complain about the mods stone walling. And you know there will be a next time.

Regards,
Shodan

[DSeid]

May I also a small recommendation - when satirizing someone else’s post by “fixing that you you” how about posting it as follows:

@NOT the person being made fun of

text text modified text text

Or such?

Would that be allowable?

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@Colibri

-To avoid misunderstandings, it’s better not to “fix” typos or omissions, unless they change the meaning (and in such cases use square brackets to indicate the change).

Be aware that this sometimes happens by accident, by people who use Spellcheck and don’t notice that a particular correction is in the quoted part and not their own words.

[Munch]

Colibri said:

This is what magellan’s post had. The quote doesn’t contain “Originally posted by” with the poster’s name.

I’d suggest you not stick with that particular language, since there are some posters on the board that somehow don’t understand how to use the “Quote” button, and do it manually, like I just did. And because there are enough rules lawyers that will somehow think this is an acceptable loophole, and come back here to complain when they get their wrists slapped.

[Colibri]

@Munch

Colibri said:

I’d suggest you not stick with that particular language, since there are some posters on the board that somehow don’t understand how to use the “Quote” button, and do it manually, like I just did. And because there are enough rules lawyers that will somehow think this is an acceptable loophole, and come back here to complain when they get their wrists slapped.

I said something to this effect in post#120.

The actual rule reads:

Falsely attributing a quote to another user, or modifying another’s post in order to cast him/her in a bad light, even if meant in jest, is grounds for revocation of your posting privileges.

So yes, attributing a false quote in the manner you did also would be a rules violation.

[drewtwo99]

I Can’t believe I’d live to see the day that I was glad to see a moderator warning rescinded from magellan01, but here I am.

[MrDibble]

Just bumping this to ask why this post by Melchior wasn’t modded under these rules (yes, I reported it)?

[Munch]

Or DrDeth calling everyone in a thread “Illiterati”. That’s certainly as egregious as “close minded”.

[Senegoid]

@MrDibble

Just bumping this to ask why this post by Melchior wasn’t modded under these rules (yes, I reported it)?

Maybe with Melchior they have bigger fish to fry?

Anyway, here’s a piece of this thread I’m still not perfectly clear on: Quoting people without putting it inside [noparse]

. . .

[/noparse] tags, including FTFY remarks.

What are the rules for borrowing pieces of someone else’s words, putting them in regular quotation marks instead of quote tags? This is the same question Crazyhorse mentions several posts above:

@Crazyhorse

In this thread twickster said for the first time that I know of that text within quotation marks is subject to the same rules. Until we get clarification about that there’s not much point in trying to agree on a new format.

And, in particular, what is the official proper approved permitted accepted way to make FTFY remarks (which, to be sure, are commonly snarky)?

[Skywatcher]

@MrDibble

Just bumping this to ask why this post by Melchior wasn’t modded under these rules (yes, I reported it)?

Not a peep there in over 36 hours. Maybe there was a PM?

[Jonathan_Chance]

If there was a report I missed it, but then again I’ve been in and out - such as it is - for kid duties for a few days.

Due to the ongoing nature of the discussion - and the fact that it’s several pages back - I elected to mod note Melchior in the thread. I also ended up mod noting those who are hinting about unsavory practices.

In terms of DrDeth, I’ll speak for myself only but a general condemnation like that - one not aimed at a particular poster - is less likely to draw my ire than one that singles out another poster on a personal level.

[MrDibble]

@Jonathan_Chance

Due to the ongoing nature of the discussion - and the fact that it’s several pages back - I elected to mod note Melchior in the thread.

Cool, thanks for the response here.

[Idle_Thoughts]

@MrDibble

Just bumping this to ask why this post by Melchior wasn’t modded under these rules (yes, I reported it)?

I would have had I seen it, but I’m on vacation now in Asia and have very little access (about “online for about 10 minutes MAYBE every other day” access).