# fluiddruid, we're allowed to trim quotes **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [October 28, 2010, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666 "2010-10-28T15:33:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/1 "2010-10-28T15:33:02Z")
[This mod note](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13073082&postcount=207) is clearly wrong. Here is the original post in its entirety: > [@I don't understand what Jenn Sterger is up to (regarding Farve)](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-understand-what-jenn-sterger-is-up-to-regarding-farve/558177/175): > > Deadspin is reporting that someone else has made private allegations. That’s not the same thing. Here is my reply that drew this misguided mod note: > [@I don't understand what Jenn Sterger is up to (regarding Farve)](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-understand-what-jenn-sterger-is-up-to-regarding-farve/558177/177): > > > [@I don't understand what Jenn Sterger is up to (regarding Farve)](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-understand-what-jenn-sterger-is-up-to-regarding-farve/558177/175): > > > > someone […] has made private allegations > > What was that? Can you say that one more time, I didn’t quite hear you… The idea that I changed the meaning of the quote is ridiculous. Either explain how the meaning changed, clarify that you’re asking that ALL quotes from now on are to be of entire posts only – no trimming of any kind allowed – or retract that mod note in that thread and clarify that you were either mistaken or confused. To sum up, **Dio** went on a crazy bender claiming that there are “zero allegation against Brett Favre” because he feels that the word allegation can only apply to formal complaints in a legal context. His own post (quoted here) demonstrates the fallacy of that position since he himself used the word allegation in a context other than an official complaint in a legal sense. This nullifies his entire “there are zero allegations” argument. In short, my whole point is that a private allegation is still a type of allegation. Dio himself used the term allegation, which entirely concedes his bizarre line in the sand. That a mod (whom I personally like quite a bit) doesn’t understand this very simple exchange is sad to me. That she felt a need to post a note that effectively says we can no longer abbreviate any post at all or risk running afoul of an official warning is a very bad precedent. ---
**Author:** ![garygnu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/garygnu/32/2924_2.png) [@garygnu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garygnu)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/2 "2010-10-28T15:45:54Z")
We can’t snip quotes at all now? Really? ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/3 "2010-10-28T16:07:44Z")
You should have put it in two different quote boxes…maybe… I guess. Yeah, makes no sense. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/4 "2010-10-28T16:23:00Z")
Why not just leave the word “else” in there? ---
**Author:** ![Dallas\_Jones](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dallas_jones/32/3277_2.png) [@Dallas\_Jones](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dallas_Jones)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/5 "2010-10-28T16:28:36Z")
Snipping a very large quote down to size for clarity or brevity is one thing, but **Ellis Dee** you chose to cut down a quote that was already just two short sentences that don’t even take up the width of the page. Why? Why take the time? To alter the meaning subtly, that’s why. The mod note seem perfectly justified to me. Siding with Diogenes the Cynic always gives me vertigo so I must go lie down now. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/6 "2010-10-28T16:33:43Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > Why not just leave the word “else” in there? It works either way. The point was that if _anyone_ has made _any_ kind of allegation, you can’t pedanticly dismiss people with “there are zero allegations.” I would point out that my use of ellipses is expressly allowed: [quote=“C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven, post:11, topic:369395”] **Can I modify other poster’s quotes?** 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. This does not apply to parodies to which no name is attached. Text inside [noparse] [QUOTE] [/noparse] tags is sacrosanct. Normal editorial rules apply: that is, you may indicate omitted portions of a quote by the use of ellipses “…” and 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 [noparse] > [@](#): > > [/noparse] tags. > > Be aware that for legal reasons, the Moderators do not edit posts, except to rectify coding errors or remove unacceptable links - changes that do not require editorial judgment on our part. We will delete offensive posts on request if we feel deletion is warranted, or delete the thread if removal of the offending post would render the thread meaningless. Weird that the “noparse” tag switches text to lowercase. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/7 "2010-10-28T16:34:44Z")
> [@Dallas\_Jones](#): > > Why? Why take the time? To alter the meaning subtly, that’s why. Explain how the two quotes are in any way different, much less “substantively” so. I assert that the two meanings are exactly identical. And the reason I trimmed it down wasn’t to alter the meaning, it was to draw his attention to the fact that he just conceded that _someone_ made _some kind of_ allegation. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/8 "2010-10-28T16:49:39Z")
“Deadspin is reporting that someone else has made private allegations.” That’s what Dio said “someone […] has made private allegations” That’s what you said Dio said **Dio** did not say that someone made private allegations. That doesn’t even rise to the level of paraphrasing. It is an outright deliberate false attribution. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/9 "2010-10-28T16:52:57Z")
Oh please. Dio is saying there are zero allegations, yet he admits that Deadspin is reporting that there are private allegations. How is that zero allegations? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/10 "2010-10-28T16:52:57Z")
It was really the truncation of the first part of the sentence that was significant, because it made it appear that _I_ was making an assertion (i.e that someone had made a provate allegation about Favre) that I was NOT making. I was saying that an internet tabloid reported it, and my entire point was that just because a tabloid claims somebody said something doesn’t mean they actually said it. **Diogenes the Cynic** did not say that “someone has made private allegations.” Deadspin said that. The changing of my post was intentionally misleading and deceptive, the rule was correctly enforced and that’s the end of it. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/11 "2010-10-28T16:54:55Z")
> [@EllisDee](#): > > And the reason I trimmed it down wasn’t to alter the meaning, it was to draw his attention to the fact that he just conceded that _someone_ made _some kind of_ allegation. I conceded nothing of the kind. I said that we only had deadspin’s word that someone had made an allegation. ---
**Author:** ![Dallas\_Jones](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dallas_jones/32/3277_2.png) [@Dallas\_Jones](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dallas_Jones)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/12 "2010-10-28T16:55:06Z")
> [@EllisDee](#): > > Explain how the two quotes are in any way different, much less “substantively” so. I assert that the two meanings are exactly identical. > > \*\*And the reason I trimmed it down \*\*wasn’t to alter the meaning, it was to draw his attention to the fact that he just conceded that _someone_ made _some kind of_ allegation. **Bolding added by me**. See that’s how you draw attention to the part you want someone to notice, without altering the text or attempting subtle changes in meaning. I’ve seen this done many times without complaint. The quote stays intact, you acknowledge that the bolding was added for your emphasis and the conversation goes on. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/13 "2010-10-28T16:56:50Z")
Agreed, but that’s more work. I see no functional difference. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/14 "2010-10-28T16:59:12Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I conceded nothing of the kind. I said that we only had deadspin’s word that someone had made an allegation. That is such a crock of shit. You admit that random people on a message board making wild-ass claims qualify for the word “allegation.” There is an allegation on deadspin, FULL STOP. End of story. Deadspin saying somebody “might have” said something is a fucking allegation. Do you deny that deadspin posted any claims about Favre? If anyone says anything anywhere it rises to the level of allegation as you yourself have used the word. > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I conceded nothing of the kind. I said that we only had deadspin’s word that someone had made an allegation. To reiterate, this is itself an allegation by deadspin. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/15 "2010-10-28T16:59:21Z")
> [@EllisDee](#): > > Oh please. Dio is saying there are zero allegations, yet he admits that Deadspin is reporting that there are private allegations. How is that zero allegations? It means that the allegations are only alleged. What you did was the equivalent of this: [Quote=Diogenes the Cynic] The ancient Aztecs believed that the sun was a god. [/quote] Then you changing it to this: > [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > "…the sun was a god. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/16 "2010-10-28T17:00:31Z")
> [@EllisDee](#): > > That is such a crock of shit. You admit that random people on a message board making wild-ass claims qualify for the word “allegation.” > > There is an allegation on deadspin, FULL STOP. End of story. Do you deny that deadspin posted any claims about Favre? This is a completely different issue that has nothing to do with you altering my quotes. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/17 "2010-10-28T17:06:49Z")
Ridiculous. The paring of “else” preserved the meaning of the statement perfectly. “Someone else” is someone, which was the point. Even by academic standards I don’t see what the problem would be. ---
**Author:** ![fluiddruid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fluiddruid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fluiddruid)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/18 "2010-10-28T17:07:25Z")
> [@EllisDee](#): > > The idea that I changed the meaning of the quote is ridiculous. Either explain how the meaning changed, clarify that you’re asking that ALL quotes from now on are to be of entire posts only – no trimming of any kind allowed – or retract that mod note in that thread and clarify that you were either mistaken or confused. Dio felt that it changed the meaning, and I think that’s a fair interpretation (even if not intended). It’s not really fair to compare to shortening for brevity; quoting “someone […] has made private allegations” is in fact longer than “someone else has made private allegations”. If not to subtly change the quote to make a point, what reason would there be to make this modification? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/19 "2010-10-28T17:08:33Z")
> [@EllisDee](#): > > Explain how the two quotes are in any way different, much less “substantively” so. I assert that the two meanings are exactly identical.] > > And the reason I trimmed it down wasn’t to alter the meaning, it was to draw his attention to the fact that he just conceded that _someone_ made _some kind of_ allegation. And that is exactly why you screwed up. You altered the meaning of his statement to fit your inference. **Dio** did not concede that anyone made some kind of allegation. He merely reported that someone else reported someone else the made the allegation. That doesn’t rule out that he just might believe the allegation never took place. Your quote would suggest that he definitely did. Do you believe everything you read? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2010, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666/20 "2010-10-28T17:10:50Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > Ridiculous. The paring of “else” preserved the meaning of the statement perfectly. “Someone else” is someone, which was the point. Even by academic standards I don’t see what the problem would be. I doubt that **Dio** objection was based on that particular point. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fluiddruid-were-allowed-to-trim-quotes/558666.md?page=2)