That was a joke, right? He’s not actually mod-noting that?
Sure looks like it. I guess when all you have is a hammer, everything you see is a nail.
You’re also supposed to show “…” or something to show what you cut out. This was pretty mild, of course, but it took a long paragraph and pared it down to one sentence- that wasnt really a sentence.
A Note is proper. A Warning would have been out of place.
So, he gave a Warning then? No. Thus, there’s a tool besides a hammer, eh?
Tom didn’t say anything about the clipping of the quote and given the attitude he and the other mods cop about quote boxes, I tend to think he would feel no ellipses is better because that’s MODIFYING THE QUOTE! faints.
The replacement of a comma with a period to my mind is about as venial a sin as one could imagine and if you try to tell me that it somehow changes the meaning of dale’s comment, I will laugh in your face.
Well, go ahead and laugh in my face, because I’m not seeing the problem (with the mod note) here. Given the rule on changing the meaning of quotes, seems perfectly on point.
I agree with Tom’s moderation, and think the edit subtly changed the force of Dale’s comment.
The difference is that a flat statement of “I hate Sanders” is a stronger statement of hatred - based on the implication that this was something dale was focused on - than what dale actually wrote, which was something of a self-deprecating qualification of his own assessment. IOW, a guy’s acknowledgment of his own bias in making an assessment is not as strong a statement of antipathy as a comment about the antipathy without any other context.
Not a big deal, of course, as Tom himself noted, but it’s there IMO.
What’s a bit much? That no warning was issued?
The rule is a long standing one that’s been dissected in ATMB many times. Tom’s interpretation of the rule is spot on with the intent of the rule. Good grief people, wait until they start creating new rules to bitch. Then, at least, you’re not swimming upstream against a long standing rule.
Go ahead and laugh, but it did change the meaning slightly, and it violated the standard rules of editing of quotes. An ellipsis would have been better.
And the irony, it burns. You complain about a mod note for a minor rules violation, which is about a venial a sin as one could imagine in moderating (although I don’t agree it was wrong). You accuse tomndebb of blowing things out of proportion while blowing his action out of proportion yourself.
I think this was almost certainly done accidentally.
When quoting text and you only want a few words from the middle, you can highlight text, and drag the mouse to the end. If you are not very careful, the final period isn’t highlighted. So, if you hit delete, the final period appears at the end.
That is most likely what happened here.
Shows you how good things are when that’s what we have to bitch about.
Yeah,well some folks are sticklers about.
Saying this mod note was “a bit much” is not blowing anything out of proportion. It was a silly thing to moderate. As Peter Morris says, it was almost certainly an editing error and as mentioned in tom’s note did not appreciably change the point of the original quote.
tomndebb must be having his.
Look at the whole quote. A comma was removed and the period substituted.
and the rule states that you are to note that the quote was edited - and be careful not to change the point of the original quote - which this most certainly did.
I believe the only reason that it was not a warning is giving benefit of the doubt that it was a simple mistake as you claim - but even then - as the drumpf saga so clearly pointed out, its still a warnable offense even if not intended.
I’m not sure what would be more profitable on this board - selling a stick-removal service, or selling larger, more ridiculous sticks in their place…
We have been Modding the quote boxes in the same way for over ten years. (The current list was our second or third re-writing.) If we begin not Modding them in the same way, we are going to invite a few dozen more ATMB threads complaining that we are being inconsistent. The modified quote did not substantially alter the original intent and I ascribed no malice to the change and issued no Warning. I did note that it was a violation (changing a comma to a period does not follow a “normal editorial rule”), and re-emphasized the rule.