 On the Honorable practice of "Fixing" posts, I would have expected more contraversy a |
  |
 Aug 10 2007, 09:14 AM
Post
#1
|
|||||||||||
|
Midnight Toker  Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456  |
Now, this concerns me both for the effect it may have on a traditional form of comedy and standard poster-prudence. To begin, there is no doubt that it is both dishonorable and undesirable for one poster to misrepresent the words of another poster when making a quote and that it is a valid administrative goal to prevent such misrepresentation. However, their is a bright and bold line between blatant misrepresentation and clever parody. The longstanding tradition of "fixing" the posts of others by quoting them, altering the quoted text in a humorous and satirical manner, and clearly drawing attention to the fact that the text was altered, leaving no doubt that the text was altered for the purpose of satire or parody, does not offend the canons of message board etiquette. Other, more auspicious, bodies have determined that clear and obvious parody cannot be construed as slander or libel and rightly so. Such satire, made in good humor and accepted in good humor, cannot reasonably be considered an offense against the original poster and it certainly cannot be considered an offense against the community as a whole unless all irreverent humor is considered such an offense. The prospect that such satire may be deemed an offense concerns this poster who has, on occasion, used the technique himself and who has garnered great pleasure from other's use of the technique. Exchanges such as that located in the thread stored as http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?showtopic=9729 do not provide a material benefit to the forum but they serve to forge an esprit de corps that has infinite intangible benefits. While I have no desire to see the recreation of the lounge area and understand that topical order must be maintained, it must be recognized that such mechanization of the rules without regard to poster intent and community tradition only damages the community as a whole and perverts the forum into something less than it currently is. The loss of community flavor and good-natured brotherhood that such a measure entails can only be detrimental to Dumpshock as a whole. The second concern is in the use of the standard quotation editing technique of using brackets to represent corrections, clarifications, and the removal of extraneous text. Of particular concern is the use of epilepsies in brackets to indicate the removal of extraneous information, which is most important to this message board. [...] Is commonly recognized to represent words removed from the body of an otherwise exact quote for one reason or another and is commonly used in professional, journalistic, and academic circles. It is often necessary and useful due to the fact that exact quotes can contain large amounts of extraneous text that does not relate to the topic that the quote is used to address. On message boards with easy cut-and-paste and auto-quote features, this is less necessary, but it is still useful. The removal of extraneous text from the body of a quote reduces the size of the board database. While it does not have any substantial impact in a single post, taken in aggregate the difference can be huge when compared to full quotes of long posts, particularly when a series of quotes are exchanged. It is also makes things less confusing for readers, when it is done correctly. By removing points that are not intended to be addressed from a quote, a replying poster can better clarify his argument, which is better for everyone in the long run, and readers are saved from the requirement of reading the extraneous test all over again. |
||||||||||
 |
 
|
||||||||||
|
Aug 10 2007, 09:28 AM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,468 Joined: 5-December 06 From: Somewhere in the Flooding, CalFree Member No.: 10,215 |
Hmm, I know that I have done the editing of quotes myself in the parody and satirical senses and I saw the post of Adam's on that day and I was frankly confused by it, since I had seen the comedic alterations done a number of times, even on occasion by admins. I never saw any harm in its use for the purposes of comedy or satire and I have never seen it used any other way, so I did not see what the problem with it is.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 10 2007, 09:38 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Validating Posts: 7,999 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,890 |
Yeah, I was rather confused by the whole thing myself. Obviously taking someone's words and rearranging them in a [quote] box is one thing, but telling them you're doing so while having fun with it? That's entirely different.
And this is coming from a guy who's guilty of often misusing quotation marks to paraphrase and emphasize things. :) (I really should work on that more...) |
|
|
|
|
Aug 10 2007, 12:20 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
I also object to this being made a point of policy or enforcement. I'd like to hear from Adam (or another administrator with similar views) what objectionable elements are found in this practice, and which of those objectionable elements are not already forbidden by another rule (and of those which aren't, which could not be forbidden by another rule that covers a practice undesirable even in the absence of quote-editing).
~J |
|
|
|
|
Aug 10 2007, 01:47 PM
Post
#5
|
|
|
ghostrider Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,196 Joined: 16-May 04 Member No.: 6,333 |
Don't get yourselves too worked up. This has become a non-issue for the most part.
(Normal color for readability.) The objection lay in using this particular posting method in a malicious fashion. Since on these boards it is used to make jokes, more than anything, we aren't going to prohibit the practice, but rather we will be making sure that nobody does this in such a way that it basically breaks another board rule. So long story short? No real change. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 10 2007, 01:58 PM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Grumpy Old Ork Decker Group: Admin Posts: 3,794 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orwell, Ohio Member No.: 50 |
The real worries here were this:
1) Maliciousness. Using this as an "innocent" way to mock or insult someone. 2) The possibility that someone might get upset of offended, inadvertently, by this practice, since you are changing what they wrote, and the meaning behind it. and finally, and this one is a biggie: 3) Sheer idiocy. This is a little forum meme that's been around for a while, and I've seen it degenerate a bit on certain boards, to the point where threads become damn near unreadable due to the number of "lolz! Fixed ur post!" crap. Its not really all that amusing once, and it definitely loses it's flavor after the 8th or 10th time in a single thread. It's still up for debate behind the curtains, but I think our final stance on it is, as Eido says, that it's a non-issue. A) It's not really that big a deal, just don;t abuse it. Doesn't matter what the meme or why it's being done or how funny everyone and their dog thinks it is, if it gets used to the point where it's derailing things or detracting from actual Shadowrun discussions, we'll tell you to stop. As long as it's used in sparse moderation, no biggie. B) As a tangent to this, though, never, ever misquote someone deliberately for any reason during normal debate and discussion. Besides the fact it's pretty easy to track and see that they were misquoted, it's incredibly rude and as far as we're concerned, cause for us to step in and take some kind of action. We're in the process of redoing the ToS and poster Guidelines and all that. This sort of thing should be covered in there to some degree. Bull |
|
|
|
|
Aug 10 2007, 03:20 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,950 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
Maybe something in the TOS that Dumpshock will no longer be a happy, fun, good-time place to visit?
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 10 2007, 04:19 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
Man. I hope everyone -- especially the this-is-my-serious-face-mods posting here -- appreciates that I managed to make it all the way to the end of this thread, without quoting anyone, deleting their text, and just writing "Heehee, I'm gay!" and then clicking the submit post button.
The temptation was there, trust me. Just to break the mood. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 10 2007, 04:20 PM
Post
#9
|
|||
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
I have often edited stuff out of quotes before because I'm only interested in commenting on one or two points in an otherwise huge post, and I've done the ellipses points thing, but I didn't know that I was supposed to put them in brackets. That's good to know, thanks. Should they be used when cutting things from the beginning and end of a quote (like I just did), or only when you're cutting things from the middle? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 10 2007, 04:23 PM
Post
#10
|
|||
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
:D edit: In an attempt to redeem this post: Thanks, hyzmarca, for your well thought out and well written original post. Not that I'm anyone who matters, but it's still nice to see diplomatic dialog instead of "OMFG u mods are teh suck!!1" :-) And Critias, your post is still making me giggle. :) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 10 2007, 04:46 PM
Post
#11
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,206 Joined: 9-July 06 From: Fresno, CA Member No.: 8,856 |
Without referring to MLA guidelines I’d have to guess thus: When your quote represents an entire thought ellipsis is unnecessary. If you were, for example, highlighting a phrase in a sentence then you would need ellipsis. Also, if there is any risk of your quote being taken out of context ellipsis should be used. Such as two sentences where the second places a condition on the first, and quoting only the first may change the meaning. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 10 2007, 04:51 PM
Post
#12
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
I'm not sure there's any consensus, except when your passage begins or ends within a sentence or possibly paragraph. The braces are actually optional (or rather, not always used with ellipses--a substitution is always placed in braces), but are less ambiguous, especially if the quoted user uses ellipsis for sentence flow. Note that <snip> is a similar construct. I haven't seen it around these parts in a while, but you may run into it, particularly on mailing lists. Sometimes a reason for the snip is given inside the angle-brackets. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 10 2007, 04:54 PM
Post
#13
|
|||
|
Genuine Artificial Intelligence Group: Members Posts: 4,019 Joined: 12-June 03 Member No.: 4,715 |
Thanks for the clarification. So then, my quote of Critias was a demonstrative tool and not, in fact, a puerile stunt. ;) edit: Thanks Kagetenshi. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 10 2007, 04:57 PM
Post
#14
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,206 Joined: 9-July 06 From: Fresno, CA Member No.: 8,856 |
They are not necessarily mutually exclusive. :spin: |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 10 2007, 05:38 PM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Uncle Fisty Group: Admin Posts: 13,891 Joined: 3-January 05 From: Next To Her Member No.: 6,928 |
*trying this without scary mod face* The issue with the quote that brougth this all up was the manner of it. I was within a quote box suggesting a direct quote, but the text it's self was changed without any indicators. So if there had say been a The problem is misquoting rather than joking or snipping a quote. Hope that helps some.
:P Better? :D |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 10 2007, 05:47 PM
Post
#16
|
|||
|
Grumpy Old Ork Decker Group: Admin Posts: 3,794 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orwell, Ohio Member No.: 50 |
Heh. :) S'kay. We're not trying to be dicks, really. Well, ok, I am. But I'm under a lot of stress these days. I just can't help it. ;) No, seriously. There' actually be a lot of backstage chatter about this stuff. I'm fairly certain even with only what, the 9 mods that we have now, our Mod Forum is getting more action than the SR3 forum is ;) Granted, half of that's drunken Gen Con planning, but still... We've been tossing around a lot of idea and we're really wanting to do some stuff to clean up the TOS and to write a few backstage rules as well so that hopefully the moderation is a bit more even once we relaunch, and that things are a bit clearer for the users. Bull |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 10 2007, 06:04 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Retired Admins Posts: 3,929 Joined: 26-February 02 From: .ca Member No.: 51 |
Hey all,
I apologized to Fortune after-the-fact for my actions in that thread, but didn't go back into the thread to make an apology as it had moved on and I didn't want to derail, but I'll relay that here -- I let my extreme dislike for the "fixed it for you" practice take over, did some bad administration, and pretty much everyone [including the other admins] thought I had gone nuts. And maybe I had. My post was not consistent with policy and not consistent with future policy, and I apologize: I screwed up. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 10 2007, 06:13 PM
Post
#18
|
|
|
Uncle Fisty Group: Admin Posts: 13,891 Joined: 3-January 05 From: Next To Her Member No.: 6,928 |
Hey even Capt Chaos made mistakes. Of course, he's dead now, so no one talks about it. So see Adam, if you just martyr you self.... :D
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 10 2007, 10:15 PM
Post
#19
|
|||
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
I was tossed up about whether to post in this thread. I even slept on in beforehand.
This pretty much sums up the case. As things had been resolved in PMs, there was no real need for me to bring the subject up again in the thread in question (or here for that matter). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 12th January 2026 - 06:43 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.