Baltimatt

Fixed it for you

219 posts in this topic

Do not quote people and then alter their quotes. People think it's funny to "fix" the quote of someone they disagree with, but it is misleading to pretend that a person actually said that.

 

Such posts are deleted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can the original be shown correctly with the needed and more accurate "fix" below?

 

It is funny you know. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can the original be shown correctly with the needed and more accurate "fix" below?

 

It is funny you know. :)

 

no, it's not, it's annoying and I dont do it for that reason. some have to be told, I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can the original be shown correctly with the needed and more accurate "fix" below?

 

It is funny you know. :)

 

Showing the person's name (and post #) in the box along with the altered quote is the problem. Take out the name and post #, or quote it and then ask, "Don't you mean" then then your "fix."

 

Adding emphasis to a quote isn't a problem, although it is good to point out outside the quote that the emphasis is yours.

 

Some people with long posts will have the whole thing quoted and each point or paragraph rebutted inside the quote with a distinquishing font. It's probably best to add quote tags to break up the quote, although I don't find the former objectionable as long as it is clear which is the quote and which is the commentary. That's my personal opinion, not the offical bs.com moderator position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no, it's not, it's annoying and I dont do it for that reason. some have to be told, I guess.

 

Matt... is this acceptable?

Fixed it for you K.

 

"no, it's not, whaa whaa whaa... it's annoying and I dont do it for that reason... whaa whaa whaa... some have to be told, I guess." whaa whaa whaa :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Matt... is this acceptable?

Fixed it for you K.

 

"no, it's not, whaa whaa whaa... it's annoying and I dont do it for that reason... whaa whaa whaa... some have to be told, I guess." whaa whaa whaa :)

 

see? and it's not annoying anymore!B)

 

 

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having it deleted is no big deal. By the time it is deleted you've made your point and insulted the poster. By the time it's deleted no one is likely to have been reading it anymore anyway.

 

So effectively, it's no punishment at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it kind of obvious if the words "fixed it for you" shows up that they aren't the OP's words?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[Altered quote deleted]

"Fixed it for you."

 

 

So this kind of thing is frowned upon, right? I just want to get this clear. ;)

Edited by Baltimatt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really, all they are going to do is delete your post. No biggie.

 

It's just more work for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes if a poster continues to change quotes and does not heed warnings it can lead to having posting privileges ended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But only sometimes? Like if they're not one of your buddies?

 

Oh, stop whining. We all know you want to suppress conservative opinions. Doesn't MSNBC have a forum more to your liking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, fortunately for you, you can falsely flame me like that and I can't respond in kind. So enjoy the opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, fortunately for you, you can falsely flame me like that and I can't respond in kind. So enjoy the opportunity.

 

unreal, isnt it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, stop whining. We all know you want to suppress conservative opinions. Doesn't MSNBC have a forum more to your liking?

 

what a post.:rolleyes:

 

rightys.....:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, fortunately for you, you can falsely flame me like that and I can't respond in kind. So enjoy the opportunity.

 

You seem to have no trouble holding your own. "falsely flame" is calling jd a liar, so thats a response. And why would you desire to respond to what you consider bs, with more bs? Responding "in kind" to someone you feel is lying about you perpetuates the foolish game.

 

You are no victim, and you have every ability to correct another poster. You shred other posters regularly, I know. I like you, and I think you're damn smart, but your style, you'd have to admit, brings out the angry side of posters engaging you. And some of them love it.

 

But you're far from some sort of trampled on victim here. You dish it out regularly as well as any poster I've seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, lay it on with your usual attacks pepper. It's all about me after all, right?

"falsely flame" is calling jd a liar, so thats a response.

No it isn't. It merely notes that his claim is incorrect. Many other explanations could exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anyway, here we have a blatant violation and what happens...nada nothing zilch nyet.

yep......I wonder why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right, lay it on with your usual attacks pepper. It's all about me after all, right?

No it isn't. It merely notes that his claim is incorrect. Many other explanations could exist.

 

Usual Attacks??? Pepper??? LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right, lay it on with your usual attacks pepper. It's all about me after all, right?

No it isn't. It merely notes that his claim is incorrect. Many other explanations could exist.

 

Yea, Cal, it's all about you...lol again. An incorrect claim is easily rebutted. Yet you imply that you simply can't resond "in kind". What? You can't just say the claim is incorrect? If I get into it with someone, and they make a point, Falsley flaming implies an intentional lie, not a simple error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea, Cal, it's all about you...lol again. An incorrect claim is easily rebutted. Yet you imply that you simply can't resond "in kind". What? You can't just say the claim is incorrect? If I get into it with someone, and they make a point, Falsley flaming implies an intentional lie, not a simple error.
No it doesn't. Those are your words, not mine. And of those, I certainly wouldn't take credit for the spelling.

 

Any comment on the topic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Usual Attacks??? Pepper??? LOL

 

I wouldnt get in the line of fire if I was you!:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Usual Attacks??? Pepper??? LOL

 

Eh..Cal and I get into it sometimes (all the time) and I admit he/she brings out the worst in me. I enjoy spirited debate, but I don't like Cals style, which seems engineered to cause acrimony. Theres no give and take, no conceding points, and no respect for the other poster, especially in disagreement.

 

And thats cool even if I don't like doing it that way. I still like Cal and I enjoy our back and forths.

 

(please don't tell Cal I enjoy our arguments)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now