Fixing other people's quotes

[pghplr]

It could just be me, but I find the ever growing practice of altering someones quote to be offensive. As well as just unfair to the OP. I've never had it happen to me, nor have I seen it cause alot of problems. I just think it's unfair and not very ethical to attrubute a quote to someone and saying "fixed it for ya", when the OP never said what was changed.
I may be alone on this but I think it should stop. Thank you.

[Pa. Patriot]

Let me point out that there is a rule regarding intentionally "misquoting" someone to imply they said something they did not...

Misquoting (No warning, 20 points, Expires in 1 month)
The forum software allows you users to "quote" other people's responses in their reply. While cutting out parts of a quote for brevity is OK, manipulating someone's post in a quote to make it look like they said something they did not is a big no-no.

Now, the intent here, as I understand it, is to not allow modifying someones comments in a way that would be advantageous for the person reply to then attack the person unfairly... Because they would be attacking something that the OP did not say. This is a deceitful practice.

The practice you have mentioned in this thread, as I see it, is not the same.
Unless I am thinking of posts/threads other than the one(s) that prompted you to post this Q.

When I see a quote, with a bolded "correction" and a "fixed it for you " it is usually in the context of pointing out something that the OP may have left out or otherwise an additional point the person replying wants to make.
The key difference being that these posts have a clear indicator that the post was edited/modified. Therefor it is not deceitful due to this disclosure.

Again, and in other words, the only time I see this as a violation of the rules would be if the change was made, without the clear indicator that the post was edited, in order to counter/attack the OP's position.

JMHO and I am curious as to the other mods & admins view on this.

[40twist]

"When I see a quote, with a bolded "correction" and a "fixed it for you " it is usually in the context of pointing out something that the OP may have left out or otherwise an additional point the person replying wants to make."

I agree and sometimes its in the context of just being funny ... i.e replacing words from a quote with bold text to contain a different meaning just to stir a laugh

[pghplr]

I believe we're talking about the same type of quotes. As I stated, it's never been done to me that I know of. And again, I've not seen it come up as a problem. Just that once it's been altered, there now is basically two quotes attrib'd to the same OP. Someone can post the second quote and suddenly you're defending something you never actually said. Again, it hasn't been a major problem that I see, just that I feel there is the potential for them to pop up. I don't think adding to, or altering someone in their quote box is the right way to do it. I think you should quote them and add your extra's in the post. I totally understand the practice and often laugh at the results as they were intended. It's just my opinion that its not right to hang a quote out there that wasn't actually the quote. You can change the bold back to regular and quote the second one
I'm not trying to rain on the parade, just think our quotes should remain what we say and not what we intended them to mean. Nor what others want to add to them in my name. Thats all, no biggy. Obviously I'm out there alone. lol I'm cool with that.

[Pa. Patriot]

...
I'm not trying to rain on the parade, just think our quotes should remain what we say and not what we intended them to mean. Nor what others want to add to them in my name. Thats all, no biggy. Obviously I'm out there alone. lol I'm cool with that.

I wouldn't say that, I see exactly what you're saying

I haven't seen it be a problem in the context we are discussing but I do see your point about it being a possible issue.

Better way to do it would be to make the modified quote without the attributing link, "XYZ said".. Then there would be no potential for possible future confusion.

[pghplr]

Better way to do it would be to make the modified quote without the attributing link, "XYZ said".. Then there would be no potential for possible future confusion.

I agree, thats how I feel about it. Thanks for understanding what I meant. No one's ever accused me of being a wordsmith!

[HiredGoon]

Yeah, pghplr I see your point as to there being several different versions of the same quote.
Good thought! The practice should be discouraged, I agree.

Oh, I was going to "fix" your original post "for ya", but decided not to

[pghplr]

Yeah, pghplr I see your point as to there being several different versions of the same quote.
Good thought! The practice should be discouraged, I agree.

Oh, I was going to "fix" your original post "for ya", but decided not to

Not that most of what I say couldn't use the help! Thanks.

[Asmodeus6]

Most of the times I see it done are either in an honest correction, or for humors sake.

And I've run 3 forums and still secondary admin 1. Its not normally done to put someone on the firing line, other than of maybe a bad joke. But I DID read the rules and saw that it is discouraged here. So that is always a good thing to have already in place. Then if someone crosses the line, well then, expect the punishment.

Misquoting someone to bring on a flame war is grounds for a vacation in my book. And if I caught someone doing it on my board - thats exactly what they would get. But if its done in jest, even if its a rough one pointed at you. Ease up. Its only the internet. If you can't take a zinger now and then, you should close your IE browser now. Cause they are going to happen.

[Pa. Patriot]

...Ease up. Its only the internet.

What?!?!

No way fella...


Heh - got to use it twice in one day