Changing other's quoted text - bad, evil or indifferent?

[Kahuna Burger]

A netiquitte issue if anyone would like to put their opinion in...

I've seen a couple of cases where people using the quote function change what is said in the orriignal text. Sometimes this is obvious, like

A. Poster said
Nothing of any real value...

followed by flame...

Other times the change is refered to in the followup but not neccassarily obvious if you don't read the reply right after the orriginal

A. Poster said
I consider myself to be morally neutral evil

"Fixed that for ya...."
followed by flame.

Rarely I have seen cases where sentances were simply added, or relevant bits removed without ellipses.

So my question is, how seriously should this be taken? personally I'm inclined to take it very seriously except for the most obvious cases. What are the general (and more importantly moderator) thoughts?

Kahuna burger

 

[Olive]

I don't care if it's clear that it's been changed (ie. italicised, and some sort of comment made stright after. As in...

So my question is, how seriously should this be taken? personally I'm inclined to take it very seriously except for the most oblivious cases. What are the general (and more importantly moderator) thoughts?

Kahuna burger

Fixed that for ya!

Or sniping and indicating it (or where it's obvious, like it's one line), that's cool too. but if i did this:

A netiquitte issue if anyone would like to put their opinion in about how much I hate piratcat, and with complete justification too...

You bad man!!!

Well, I'd report that to a mod.

 

[Umbran]

So my question is, how seriously should this be taken? personally I'm inclined to take it very seriously except for the most obvious cases. What are the general (and more importantly moderator) thoughts?

In part, it depends on the useage. If it's a lighthearted discussion, and the editing is done for comedic effect, I don't see a problem.

In a more serious discussion, it's certainly rude. Borders on misrepresentation of the facts. I don't know if it is serious enough tobe morderator-actionable. The original post still exists for folks to read, and the original poster can say, "If you look, I did not say that, and did not mean that."

So, I guess I'd rank it as an annoying rudeness. It's an attempt to rile up the author, rather than address the real issue under discussion.

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Changing other's quoted text - bad, evil or indifferent?

I don't know if it is serious enough to be murderator-actionable.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

Re: Re: Re: Changing other's quoted text - bad, evil or indifferent?

...Fixed it for ya!...

Which pretty much sums up my viewpoint. If, as in the case above, you're changing something purely for comedic effect, and it's someone like hong who won't mind, then I think it's ok.

However, changing a quote from someone in order to twist their words is very rude and deserves a slapping down.

Quoting fragments of posts is irritating too, but what's worse is quoting an eight paragraph post, and then adding "I agree" on the bottom.

 

[Hand of Evil]

I will cut out some text and quote part but will not change the words. If you are quoting it is just wrong to change the text, sure you could take the quote out of context by adding the "...before and after..." but I try to do complete sentences or paragraghs because that is what I am responding.

 

[rbingham2000]

The only changes I make to a quote other than snippage of long posts are small spelling and punctuation changes (I'm a real stickler for those, let me tell you), but I leave the general content of the quote intact and unchanged.

I take the twisting of one's words in an online quote very seriously. It is as childish, cruel and asinine as when it's done IRL, and it has absolutely no place in a serious discussion because nothing good can come of it at all.

 

[jdavis]

Often I cut out all of the quote except what I am replying to, especially if the quote is long, this is done for the sake of clarity, I would never change somebody's quote. I would think you would have to go on a case by case judgement, if it's a obvious joke then that is one thing but if it is malicious or is trying to twist somebodies words then that is rude and uncalled for. In real long threads people don't always go back to the start and read every post (particularly if the original post is on a diferent page) they just read what is quoted, changing stuff in the quote could be misleading and confusing.

 

[Sixchan]

So, is correcting spelling and (honestly) clarifying meaning okay?

 

[Kahuna Burger]

So, is correcting spelling and (honestly) clarifying meaning okay?

I'd say no. If the meaning was clear enough to you that you feel you can "clarify" or correct it with absolute accuracy, its clear enough to be read by everyone else. If your inner editor can't leave it alone... well, they have medication for that level of obsessive compulsive... (huh, I should find me some before I go on another mine sweeper/free cell rampage....)

Kahuna Burger