# Revised rule about quotes **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [March 9, 2018, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291 "2018-03-09T17:59:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2018, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/21 "2018-03-10T11:32:06Z")
> [@John\_DiFool](#): > > Now, just want to be 100% clear. . Start by explaining just WTF an “espresso user” is.😕 ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2018, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/22 "2018-03-10T13:01:56Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > Start by explaining just WTF an “espresso user” is.😕 They can quit any time they want. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2018, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/23 "2018-03-10T14:14:41Z")
> [@Skywatcher](#): > > Not really. The long standing rule is to not alter any quotes attributed to a real SDMB user, seems to me that this is simply clarifying to include quotation marks. > > Unattributed quotes inside quotation marks are still fair game. It’s still a change. Problem is, while unattributed quote boxes are well-defined > [@](#): > > This is an unattributed quote box because I did not include a name in the quote tag unattributed quotation marks are not. In the normal world, clearly indicated parody would not count as an actual attribution. But it is unclear if this is the case here. I know that “FTFY” posts are treated as actual attributions, even though that abbreviation clearly indicates that the person did not say what is being quoted. In practice, I don’t use very many parody quotes, so it won’t really affect me. But I am interested in what exactly counts as an attribution for quotation marks. I am glad, for example, that obviously paraphrased quotes do not count. I know what my common sense would say, but mine has always been different than the mods’. I don’t expect the mods to be able to necessarily articulate everything all at once. Watching how they moderate will be instructive. I presume that mod notes will continue to be used in all but the most egregious cases, so it shouldn’t be hard to observe in practice. without worry of accidentally crossing the line. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2018, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/24 "2018-03-10T16:32:13Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > No. You are not allowed to alter text in the quote box, even if it is your own. This falls under part a in the post from Ed. Then I humbly suggest the written rule reflect that. Right now, the rule is about other users: > [@Ed\_Zotti](#): > > We’re revising the rule about quoting other users. The revision aligns the written rule with current mod practice and is not a major departure. > > Here’s the revised rule: > > Falsely attributing a quote to another SDMB user, or modifying another’s post in order to cast him/her in a bad light, is grounds for revocation of your posting privileges. We allow parody quotes under certain conditions. Here are the permissible options: Part a. is a specification of the “rule about quoting other users”. Perhaps the intended rule is: > [@](#): > > We’re revising the rule about quoting [del]other[/del] users. The revision aligns the written rule with current mod practice and is not a major departure. > > Here’s the revised rule: > > Falsely attributing a quote to a[del]nother[/del] SDMB user, or modifying a[del]nother’s[/del] post in order to cast him/her in a bad light, is grounds for revocation of your posting privileges. We allow parody quotes under certain conditions. Here are the permissible options: ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2018, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/25 "2018-03-10T18:50:33Z")
Looks good to me, though I’d like to see it extended: if you’re quoting, you’re quoting and the same rules should apply to quoting non-Dopers as to Dopers. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2018, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/26 "2018-03-10T20:20:43Z")
This is what we get when we hire the last copy-editor in the world … ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2018, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/27 "2018-03-11T18:55:00Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I am interested in what exactly counts as an attribution for quotation marks. This sort of thing, I’m guessing: > [@Longevity in seventeenth-century U.S. and primitive societies](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/longevity-in-seventeenth-century-u-s-and-primitive-societies/809178/19): > > jtur88 writes: > > \> So many people today inherit life-shortening genes, and we keep them alive until they can reproduce more issue with life-shortening > \> genes. > > Do you have any proof of this claim? ---
**Author:** ![Ed\_Zotti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/fbc32d/32.png) [@Ed\_Zotti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ed_Zotti)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2018, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/28 "2018-03-11T22:29:55Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > 1. How strict are you planning to be with the quotation marks thing? I can easily see someone posting something like this: Two things should be kept in mind. First, we don’t routinely scrutinize quotes; mainly we respond to complaints. Second, in this as in all things, we try to use common sense. We recognize that quotation marks are often used casually, and that sometimes a quoted expression is actually just a paraphrase. What I had in mind here was an extended quotation to which the poster is responding. The fact that quotation marks are used rather than a quote box shouldn’t be construed as license to misquote someone. That said, if in practice extending the rule to quotation marks proves too confusing, we may restrict it to quote boxes only. > [@](#): > > 1. I got a (reversed) warning awhile ago for replacing a pronoun with words in brackets that I believed (and the poster agreed) were an accurate summary of the pronoun’s antecedent. You mentioned above that brackets should be used to **add** , not **replace** , words in a post. Will replacing words with brackets merit mod action? That seems reasonable to me, but I hope you’ll be understanding with folks who miss this nuance, as often brackets are used for replacement, not simple addition. This part of the rule wasn’t changed. Again, common sense will be the guide. Bracketed insertions should serve to clarify, not change the meaning. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2018, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/29 "2018-03-11T23:39:46Z")
> [@Ed\_Zotti](#): > > … in this as in all things, we try to use common sense. We recognize that quotation marks are often used casually, and that sometimes a quoted expression is actually just a paraphrase. What I had in mind here was an extended quotation to which the poster is responding. The fact that quotation marks are used rather than a quote box shouldn’t be construed as license to misquote someone. That said, if in practice extending the rule to quotation marks proves too confusing, we may restrict it to quote boxes only. Thanks for the clarification, Ed. Extending the strict rule to quotation marks had concerned me, too, because it’s quite common to use them to paraphrase in good faith in order to get to the perceived core of an argument. It shouldn’t be a transgression to say something like {quote} Your “I don’t care” attitude is what I’m addressing here {unquote} which is pretty clearly paraphrasing the understanding of a message rather than implying that the person actually said those exact words.\* People often object to their comments being paraphrased on the grounds that the paraphrase isn’t accurate, and IMHO that’s just the normal course of debate. It shouldn’t be grounds for complaints and sanctions just because it’s within quotation marks if it’s done in good faith and isn’t an obvious attempt to misrepresent their actual words. I think we all agree that quote boxes themselves are different, and must not be altered except within the stated editorial rules. – - Or maybe a better example: [Quote box containing an actual quote.] ISTM that what this really means is “xxxxxxx”. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2018, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/30 "2018-03-12T00:05:57Z")
> [@Ed\_Zotti](#): > > Two things should be kept in mind. Thanks for these clarifications. I found myself alarmed by this post, but if the intent is to keep things basically the same as it’s been–and especially if any changes will be done via notes and not warnings wherever it’s reasonable to do so–then I’m less concerned. ---
**Author:** ![Francis\_Vaughan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/francis_vaughan/32/3093_2.png) [@Francis\_Vaughan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Francis_Vaughan)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2018, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/31 "2018-03-12T14:57:33Z")
Just a few thoughts. Reading this and the parallel thread there, it looked as if there were some issues with the precise wording, but going back and reading them - they are a masterpiece of conciseness. They do actually accurately capture the constraints - even though you need to read them carefully. However I think there is some value in decoupling the initial sentence about grounds for revocation of posting privileges from the rest, as they serve two different purposes. The rules about how to quote properly, are ones of style and politeness (and not being a jerk.) They belong with other rules about content and conduct. That is a separate problem to deliberate bad behaviour in misquoting or attributing something with the intent to cast someone in a bad light. One notes currently it would appear that misquoting or attributing to make them appear in a _better_ light is OK. However it clearly falls afoul of the general rules on content of quotations - just not grounds for revocation of privileges. Currently with the two aspects of the rules running into one another it appears that the rules for quotations are a subsection of the rule about misattribution being grounds for revocation. They sort of are, but they don’t really belong there. The manner in which the first part of the rule talks about _other_ SDMB users, where the rules of quoted content implicitly refer to _any_ SDMB user mask the element of the rules of quoting also referring to quoting one’s self. Really this is minor nit picking in the extreme - but I can’t sleep - so my 2 cents worth. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2018, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/32 "2018-03-12T22:35:07Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > But quoting parts of posts to respond to strikes me as best practice, as long as it’s done in good faith–and if it’s not, generally the person being quoted points that out quickly. I’d hope that mods would only get involved in egregious cases, and in those cases treating it as a jerk move, not establishing a new rule. I agree it should be acceptable if done in good faith. However, IME it’s pretty common for people to snip posts in a way that allows them to pretend that the quoted post has a certain meaning that they prefer to impute, and which would have been difficult if not impossible had they quoted more completely. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2018, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/33 "2018-03-16T20:14:58Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > FTFY… 😕 “FTFY”? ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2018, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291/34 "2018-03-16T20:28:22Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > 😕 “FTFY”? “Fixed That For You” It was a lame joke, and I never explain jokes, lame or not. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-rule-about-quotes/810291.md?page=1)