(May 4, 2020 at 11:18 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote:

(May 4, 2020 at 12:38 pm)onlinebiker Wrote: There was this bunch of guys in 1776 running around with guns defying the government that would find your silly hippie notions laughable.

It’s a shame that the guys storming state capitols with guns have largely been doing so while siding with a tyrant who fancies himself as a dictator this time around.

And simple fact that not every group of heavily armed wacko's proclaiming they are the harbingers of freedom are the American revolutionaries . In fact history shows disturbing tendency of the opposite .

Quote:NOTE:  This forum has rules, so you should care about quoting members accurately.  See #18. 

Your "renegade" quoting style of deleting usernames from your responses fails to alert member that they are being addressed by you, and you're reproducing members' content without giving proper credit/citing your source.

As an aside, Staff have had a bit of a chin wag about this and the upshot is...no. Leaving a poster's name out of a quoted response doesn't violate the rule against quoting inaccurately, since it doesn't alter the content of what is being responded to. And - it the cases where it happens - it really doesn't appear to present a difficulty in determining who is being responded to.

That being said, it's generally a good idea to include the name of the author of the post to which you're responding, but failing to do so doesn't rise to the level of an actionable violation of the Rules.

Boru

That being said, it's generally a good idea to include the name of the author of the post to which you're responding, but failing to do so doesn't rise to the level of an actionable violation of the Rules.












That's good. :-)

Luckily we still have one group that it's okay to stereotype.

What?
Men?
:-)

(May 5, 2020 at 7:44 am)Little lunch Wrote: What?
Men?
:-)

Luckily, I'm not white. I'm Oirish.

(May 5, 2020 at 7:54 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(May 5, 2020 at 7:44 am)Little lunch Wrote: What?
Men?
:-)

Luckily, I'm not white. I'm Oirish.

Welcime to Earth.. Which direction is the planet Oiri?

(May 5, 2020 at 10:34 am)onlinebiker Wrote:

(May 5, 2020 at 7:54 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Luckily, I'm not white. I'm Oirish.

Welcime to Earth.. Which direction is the planet Oiri?

Right up it, mate.

(May 5, 2020 at 5:15 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

Quote:NOTE:  This forum has rules, so you should care about quoting members accurately.  See #18. 

Your "renegade" quoting style of deleting usernames from your responses fails to alert member that they are being addressed by you, and you're reproducing members' content without giving proper credit/citing your source.

As an aside, Staff have had a bit of a chin wag about this and the upshot is...no. Leaving a poster's name out of a quoted response doesn't violate the rule against quoting inaccurately, since it doesn't alter the content of what is being responded to. And - it the cases where it happens - it really doesn't appear to present a difficulty in determining who is being responded to.

That being said, it's generally a good idea to include the name of the author of the post to which you're responding, but failing to do so doesn't rise to the level of an actionable violation of the Rules.

Boru

I disagree that it presents no difficulty determining who's being responded it to; particularly in a high traffic thread where there may be multiple responses or even pages between posts. Additionally, folks are unaware they're being addressed without returning through the thread and searching for a response or happening to notice that they've been quoted. 

There's simply no good reason to be going out of one's way DELETE members names before responding them. It's obviously done to hinder other people's to ability to make a rebuttal. It's poor form; not to mention a total bitch-made PUSSY move.

But--your house, your rules. 
So whatever.

(May 5, 2020 at 1:22 pm)Athene Wrote:

(May 5, 2020 at 5:15 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: As an aside, Staff have had a bit of a chin wag about this and the upshot is...no. Leaving a poster's name out of a quoted response doesn't violate the rule against quoting inaccurately, since it doesn't alter the content of what is being responded to. And - it the cases where it happens - it really doesn't appear to present a difficulty in determining who is being responded to.

That being said, it's generally a good idea to include the name of the author of the post to which you're responding, but failing to do so doesn't rise to the level of an actionable violation of the Rules.

Boru

I disagree that it presents no difficulty determining who's being responded it to; particularly in a high traffic thread where there may be multiple responses or even pages between posts. Additionally, folks are unaware they're being addressed without returning through the thread and searching for a response or happening to notice that they've been quoted. 

There's simply no good reason to be going out of one's way DELETE members names before responding them. It's obviously done to hinder other people's to ability to make a rebuttal. It's poor form; not to mention a total bitch-made PUSSY move.

But--your house, your rules. 
So whatever.

It's called "being a petty cunt".