I selected Paulatic's words from the post immediately above this one, where they were quoted by Jdsk, and they have been misattributed to Jdsk.
Etiquette when quoting
Re: Etiquette when quoting
Let's see.
Re: Etiquette when quoting
Just to make the etiquette more complicated, replies can be ambiguous too, with even the best of intentions misinterpreted as aggression. Or is it the other way round?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ade-phonesThe unfathomable thumbs up reply (is it a yes or is it passive aggression?).
Re: Etiquette when quoting
Without a good example, I have no idea how a thumbs-up could be interpreted badly. But I'm with the write on this gripe:Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑8 Jun 2023, 2:45pm Just to make the etiquette more complicated, replies can be ambiguous too, with even the best of intentions misinterpreted as aggression. Or is it the other way round?https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ade-phonesThe unfathomable thumbs up reply (is it a yes or is it passive aggression?).
Sadly that ship has long since sailed ... and I even find myself doing it ...The gratuitous misuse of ellipses (it’s supposed to represent an omission of words for impact! What is the impact of “Ok… I’ll come and collect you…” other than communicating that you are in fact a murderer?).
Re: Etiquette when quoting
It surprised me too, and I agree an example or two would have made it clearer. But perhaps it already is clear to some people. I'm similarly surprised at applying the concept of copyright to everything written on a forum such as this, but clearly some people feel strongly about that.mattheus wrote: ↑8 Jun 2023, 4:18pmWithout a good example, I have no idea how a thumbs-up could be interpreted badly.Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑8 Jun 2023, 2:45pm Just to make the etiquette more complicated, replies can be ambiguous too, with even the best of intentions misinterpreted as aggression. Or is it the other way round?https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ade-phonesThe unfathomable thumbs up reply (is it a yes or is it passive aggression?).
Anyway, giving it some thought, I suppose the thumbs up could sometimes be taken as sarcastic. As in:
But I'm with the write on this gripe:Sadly that ship has long since sailed ... and I even find myself doing it ...The gratuitous misuse of ellipses (it’s supposed to represent an omission of words for impact! What is the impact of “Ok… I’ll come and collect you…” other than communicating that you are in fact a murderer?).
Re: Etiquette when quoting
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Re: Etiquette when quoting
Just came up elsewhere... quoting should not be taken to imply disagreement. It can be simply continuation of the same topic.
Jonathan
Jonathan
Re: Etiquette when quoting
The Law of Unmeant Meanings.
Re: Etiquette when quoting
More on 1.Carlton green wrote: ↑7 Jun 2023, 12:30pmFollowing your format and in answer to your points.Jdsk wrote: ↑7 Jun 2023, 10:55am This has just come up elsewhere, specifically about showing or removing the name of the poster of the quoted text.
My first thoughts:
1 Pruning the quoted post is generally good practice because it allows the reader to concentrate on the specific issue.
2 Removing the name was criticised in the other discussion. But removing the name can be used in a constructive attempt to avoid personalisation and feuding.
Thoughts, please.
1) Pruning a post might allow focus but it might also take away context. Wilfully quoting someone out of context is, as far as I’m concerned, unreasonable behaviour. Something that I occasionally do is add bold or underlining to someone else’s text (to highlight a specific point) but I also note (advise) that that is what I’ve done.
2) Generally I think it best to leave the name. There are occasions when I don’t, sometimes that’s due to convenience and sometimes that’s to defuse arguments; in my opinion discussions are helpful but arguments are not.
Emboldening can be very helpful, and, as you say, the quoter should say that they have done it.
We see occasional posts along the lines of Fixed that for you where the quoter changes part of the quoted text. I guess that it is sometimes meant in humour but it's also sometimes done aggressively. It's best avoided.
And then there's deliberately changing the content of the quoted text. This should never be done. If you want to frame the development of a line of reasoning it can be done by sequential paragraphs with each quote being what was actually written. Any editorialising should be done outside the quotation.
Jonathan
Re: Etiquette when quoting
Emboldening is discriminatory because it is difficult for some people to read and almost invisible (inaudible) on some screen readers. In almost all cases, it would be better to either trim the quote more or to requote the relevant phrase at an appropriate point in one's own comment.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
-
- Posts: 36776
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Etiquette when quoting
I wonder if this has had no replies because the subject "Etiquette when quoting" is low on people's priorities. (A roundabout way of saying few forum members could care less.)mjr wrote: ↑19 Jun 2023, 12:32pmEmboldening is discriminatory because it is difficult for some people to read and almost invisible (inaudible) on some screen readers. In almost all cases, it would be better to either trim the quote more or to requote the relevant phrase at an appropriate point in one's own comment.
Commenting both as an IT numpty and as somebody who sometimes uses the "bold" facility in this way I'd say that this practice constitutes only a tiny part of the bold script appearing on the forum, a large part of which is dictated by the forum software.
-
- Posts: 3646
- Joined: 22 Jun 2019, 12:27pm
Re: Etiquette when quoting
Surely an act really need to be a wilful, informed and targeted act for it to be discriminatory, obviously a group of people can be unintentionally disadvantaged but that’s just life.mjr wrote: ↑19 Jun 2023, 12:32pmEmboldening is discriminatory because it is difficult for some people to read and almost invisible (inaudible) on some screen readers. In almost all cases, it would be better to either trim the quote more or to requote the relevant phrase at an appropriate point in one's own comment.
Trimmed quotes risk - and to often have - loss of original context.
Would underling work better than emboldening? Do nothing disadvantages everyone equally, nobody gets the benefit of better communication.
Don’t fret, it’s OK to: ride a simple old bike; ride slowly, walk, rest and admire the view; ride off-road; ride in your raincoat; ride by yourself; ride in the dark; and ride one hundred yards or one hundred miles. Your bike and your choices to suit you.
Re: Etiquette when quoting
IMO, most discrimination is neither willful nor informed, but merely neglectful, and sometimes just ignorant.Carlton green wrote: ↑20 Jun 2023, 1:04pm
Surely an act really need to be a wilful, informed and targeted act for it to be discriminatory, obviously a group of people can be unintentionally disadvantaged but that’s just life.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
-
- Posts: 36776
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Etiquette when quoting
I didn't intend to start a discussion about types of discrimination. My point is that if there's a problem with bold text, it goes a lot further than quoting etiquette.