The first - apparently quoting Trump - appears to be an invention. A lie and a slur. The second is what Trump actually said, but is unattributed. Neither has so far attracted comment from the Mods. Both posts do nothing to fight ignorance. That thread will likely be updated in the future as McCain’s illness progresses and he dies. Which of those two posts do you think is likely to be remembered? Which one will be referenced? Left as is - I think the first should be stomped and the second attributed - is sending the wrong message to the readership.
Quartz has a point. 500 years from now, we wouldn’t want mutant cockroaches to find that quote and get the impression that Trump was some kind of jerk.
The first Trump quote is a “joke” or “satire”.
The second is a true quote of a tweet. You can tell it’s real by the clueless final phrase "Get well soon’.
Here’s the rule, if the OP is interested.Not this section, which explain what type of quotes it applies to:
I have a Facebook friend who periodically starts long rambling posts with the words “I’m not a Trump supporter but…” After a while, she really starts to look a lot like a Trump supporter. Just sayin’.
Not that every post we make needs to “fight ignorance”, but it’s hard to argue that quoting the actual words of the president does not do so to some extent. The second quote you linked to is, by your own admission, the actual words of the president.
Right. If we moderated every joke at a politician’s expense we would be very busy indeed. Nor can I imagine that we would insist that every quote of anyone anywhere must be attributed.
As has been said, there is no rule against modifying quotes of non-posters. If someone fabricated a quote and pretended it was real, there might be an issue, but in this case the first quote was clearly a parody, and the second was both accurate and attributed within the quote.
I still say you need to ask yourself why you seem especially interested in alleged infractions when they are about President Trump but not in every other instance. If you were, you’d know that his sort of thing has always been allowed.
If you don’t support Trump, then there seems to be some cognitive dissonance going on.
Trump support or lack thereof is independent of potential rule violations. In this instance I would look to one of the guiding principles of moderation, namely, was there a rule violation. The answer is no, there was not.
Has he been falsely accused of anything? I tried a search, but all the hits I’m getting involve the man falsely accusing others (wiretap accusations, etc).
Can you point me to other ATMB threads where you have asked for moderation of posts about another politician who has been the subject of a joke or unattributed quote?