I was in the process of exiting that thread and hoping to never hear of it again, but this renewed scrutiny I think involves some misinterpretation. The poster said “he could have killed the guy”, which is absolutely true – Ritchson is big and muscular and surely could have. Is he to be commended because he threw a few angry punches, injured the victim, and let it go at that? That was my point. He should not have been involved in a street brawl in the first place.
What on earth was “misleading” about my quote snippet? Maybe it was misinterpreted as meaning that the guy Ritchson attacked nearly died, but it should have been clear that that was certainly not what I meant. I only meant to say that Ritchson was fully capable of it, but the fact that he didn’t go that far was surely not a virtue to be commended.
If I just read the snippet, I’d assume the intended meaning was “the actions he took could have resulted in the guy’s death.” Which is very different from iiandyiiii’s meaning of “he had the ability to kill the guy, but instead the actions he took were restrained.”
I think you’re missing the exact moderation for the details of the subject.
You’re being moderated for providing an incomplete quote without context, which of course modifies the original poster’s intent. Whether or not I agree with @iiandyiiii, the full quote establishes the situation the subject of the thread found themselves in, and that, yes, by those standards, it IS a matter of showing some restraint. Again, repeating @iiandyiiii’s stated feelings, I am not making a statement of agreement or factuality.
When you only quoted the segment that supported your comeback, you affected the meaning of what you quoted. You could have quoted the whole section and bolded the specific section (while admitting the bolding was yours), or indicated it was a snip at a minimum which let everyone else know it was an incomplete quote.
Again this is a hard and fast rule when direct quoting other Posters in all forums. If you editorialize or edit, you must acknowledge having done so.
OK, mea culpa. I did not realize that my quote snippet could have been misinterpreted, but it was certainly not my intent to misrepresent the meaning of what I was quoting, as I just noted upthread. So, an unintentional screwup. I apologize.
