# So, NO altering of quotes, even if just for purely humorous effect, is allowed either? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [March 7, 2018, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195 "2018-03-07T18:50:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/41 "2018-03-08T15:32:50Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > So, you’re saying you think people shouldn’t use quote tags. Huh. That’s always been allowed, sorta. I don’t think you can say “Kayaker said [edited quote]” but it’s my understanding that you can say: > [@](#): > > I’m saying you think people shouldn’t use quote tags ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/42 "2018-03-08T15:35:54Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > The point is that the rule should remove any quibbles that **could** lead to rules-lawyering. 😉 I’ve been on this board since early 1999, and I don’t think it is possible to come up with a rule that removes all chances of rules-lawyering. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/43 "2018-03-08T15:38:39Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I’ve been on this board since early 1999, and I don’t think it is possible to come up with a rule that removes all chances of rules-lawyering. How about a rule that says “No rules lawyering”. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/44 "2018-03-08T15:41:07Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > I’ll point out that there’s no rule about misquoting people inside quote SIGNS. > > " " > > Just saying. That’s would not be inside , that’d be in-between quote signs. right rule-lawyers? ---
**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 8, 2018, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/45 "2018-03-08T15:43:45Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > How about a rule that says “No rules lawyering”. Objection! Lacks foundation and is more prejudicial than probative. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/46 "2018-03-08T15:48:34Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > I’ll point out that there’s no rule about misquoting people inside quote SIGNS. > > " " > > Just saying. LOOP HOLE !!! “We’re going to beat the crap out of you because there’s no rule about misquoting MORONS inside quote signs.” I plead insanity to all charges … ---
**Author:** ![Jasmine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jasmine/32/2964_2.png) [@Jasmine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jasmine)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/47 "2018-03-08T16:43:23Z")
I will brook no ambiguity or literary license as far as quotes are concerned. It is either EXACT, or it isn’t a QUOTE. It’s pretty much as simple as that. Once you cross the line, how far do you go, and who determines that? ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/48 "2018-03-08T16:55:54Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > I’ll point out that there’s no rule about misquoting people inside quote SIGNS. > > " " > > Just saying. To avoid ambiguity, I personally avoid even that. I use apostrophes instead. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/49 "2018-03-08T16:58:29Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > I’ll point out that there’s no rule about misquoting people inside quote SIGNS. > > " " > > Just saying. Yeppers. Like this, folks: “I’ll point out that there’s no rule about misquoting people inside quote [del]SIGNS[/del] MARKS.” FTFY. (Thought I might as well take my nitpick and use it as an example. Hope you don’t mind, **JC**. :)) ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/50 "2018-03-08T17:02:39Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Yeppers. Like this, folks: > > “I’ll point out that there’s no rule about misquoting people inside quote [del]SIGNS[/del] MARKS.” > > FTFY. > > (Thought I might as well take my nitpick and use it as an example. Hope you don’t mind, **JC**. :)) The downside, of course, is if you lie too often using quote marks pretty soon no one will believe anything you say. ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/51 "2018-03-08T17:08:06Z")
> [@Joey\_P](#): > > It’s odd that the OP asked if they can break a rule for specific reason when there’s a rule and it even addresses that exact reason [misquoting, in jest]. I don’t know where everybody got the idea that (a) I fervently wish to continue said practice, and am (b) thus looking for a way out, by (c) attempting to “rules lawyer” my way around the rule. I simply wanted a clarification-it’s not going to lose me any sleep. I am well aware that many such inquiries in ATMB over the years _were_ indeed intended to argue for their (favored) rule interpretation, precisely so that they could continue said practice unmodded (often leading to threads here hundreds of posts long). My OP was not intended as such. Since there does appear to be _some_ ambiguity in said rule (as raised by other Dopers in posts 4, 5, 6, 8, 33, 36, & 40), then it doesn’t seem to be an open and shut case to me, like some are arguing. I also grasp (post 9) why said practice got implemented. The ambiguous part may have been a bit of legacy language inadvertently carried over past said incident. \ ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/52 "2018-03-08T17:08:51Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > The downside, of course, is if you lie too often using quote marks pretty soon no one will believe anything you say. This also works for lying without using quote marks. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/53 "2018-03-08T17:32:16Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Yeppers. Like this, folks: > > “I’ll point out that there’s no rule about misquoting people inside quote [del]SIGNS[/del] MARKS.” > > FTFY. > > (Thought I might as well take my nitpick and use it as an example. Hope you don’t mind, **JC**. :)) > [@Czarcasm](#): > > The downside, of course, is if you lie too often using quote marks pretty soon no one will believe anything you say. JNot sure how this is apropos to my post, but whatever. You could have quoted **JC** , or nobody at all, and it would have made more sense. > [@Riemann](#): > > This also works for lying without using quote marks. Bingo. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2018, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/54 "2018-03-08T19:54:58Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > I think alterations of this sort should be allowed. We’re a comedic group, and we should be allowed to alter quotes for purely comedic (i.e., not as an ‘attack’ or ‘distortion of a position’) reasons. Making the same joke while at the same time abiding by the ‘bright line’ rules can make it cumbersome. > > Like **John DiFool** , I understand why the rule is there. But there are times when I feel like saying, ‘Lighten up, Francis!’ IMO. I disagree. Look all you have to do is quote, then copy, paste & edit. e.g. _But there are times when I feel like saying, Just follow the damn rules aready!’ IMO._ ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2018, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/55 "2018-03-09T04:00:36Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > So, you’re saying you think people shouldn’t use quote tags. Huh. No. I was pointing out that the rule about mis-quoting has parts that deal with what is permissible inside a quote tag, but also has to deal with the concept of someone mis-quoting someone without using those tags. It seemed to me that this was being missed as a possibility by some of those commenting on the rule. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2018, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/56 "2018-03-09T05:19:48Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > I’ll point out that there’s no rule about misquoting people inside quote SIGNS. > > " " > > Just saying. In part, that highlights the utility of the catch-all “don’t be a jerk” rule. ---
**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 9, 2018, 11:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/57 "2018-03-09T11:23:21Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > No. I was pointing out that the rule about mis-quoting has parts that deal with what is permissible inside a quote tag, but also has to deal with the concept of someone mis-quoting someone without using those tags. It seemed to me that this was being missed as a possibility by some of those commenting on the rule. So, you’re saying the wholesale slaughter of women and children is fine? Well I’m sorry, but I disagree. ---
**Author:** ![JeffB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jeffb/32/188_2.png) [@JeffB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JeffB)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2018, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/58 "2018-03-09T14:48:54Z")
It’s a better deal than retail. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2018, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/59 "2018-03-09T15:22:36Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > So, you’re saying the wholesale slaughter of women and children is fine? Well I’m sorry, but I disagree. Only if they forget their place and try to eat any of the bacon. Then hell yeah. ---
**Author:** ![Cartooniverse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cartooniverse/32/3084_2.png) [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2018, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195/60 "2018-03-09T18:10:42Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > In part, that highlights the utility of the catch-all “don’t be a jerk” rule. Don’t need to be Norwegian nice, but No Jerkishness around these parts is as old as Slug’s mortarboard. For my part, I always add " Bolding mine " immediately after a formal quote that I’ve bolded a portion of. Never a note. I also write, or try to remember to write, “snip” before quoting part of a post. I’ll change to the requested format of " …quoted… ". Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-no-altering-of-quotes-even-if-just-for-purely-humorous-effect-is-allowed-either/810195.md?page=4)