IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Controlling quoting abuse, Redundant quoting wastes time
Never_Again
post Feb 24 2006, 20:30
Post #1





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 698
Joined: 31-March 04
From: NYC
Member No.: 13152



I always wondered why some posters here habitually quote previous posts in their entirety - sometimes half a page of text or even more, often to add just a one-line reply.

Such "completist" quoting could be understandable on Usenet, where sooner or later all posts expire; but here all posts are archived and usually are on the same page as the reply anyway. Moreover, even on Usenet it is considered good netiquette to only quote the passages you reply to directly and leave everything else out ("trimming quotes"). Why is it not done here? TOS 11 deals with .sig abuse already, why not with quoting abuse too? It can be very annoying to have to scroll through pages of the same posts repeated over and over with little new content, especially when several such posters go on a quoting binge in the same thread.

I think I have figured out why they do it, at last. Apparently, scrolling down to the bottom/top of the page (quickly accomplished by Ctrl+End/Ctrl+Home) and clicking the Add Reply button (instead of the Reply button right under a post) is too much work for some, as is trimming the quotes. IMO, this practice is careless at best and rude at worst, as it wastes readers' time and creates pages and pages of useless ballast/junk.

I propose hereby that TOS 11 be amended to cover this issue, and the moderators remove redundant quotes from posts and warn repeat offenders.

Same goes for those who appear to regularly post when drunk/stoned, because their posts have so many misspellings/typos as to hardly resemble English. Of course, I am aware that nobody's perfect (much less so myself), and for many posters here English is not the first language. But the vast majority manage just fine (if not better than the average American :). And when I see something like

QUOTE
totakl off-topci

why is ther no smart interface ofr optical drives whcih give feedback on the level of c2 erros found while reading.
or
QUOTE
Deem like you are doin the typical mistakte thinking frequence respons and quality goes hand in hand..they dont....

I wonder where the mods are. Is that considered more acceptable than the so-called "l33t speak"?

Yeah I no I prolly need to stop worring abot such trifles taek it EZ get wit the program andbe liek every body else life iz to short blahblahblah ...
Or maybe not.

<edit: formatting>

This post has been edited by Never_Again: Feb 24 2006, 20:34
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
fairyliquidizer
post Feb 24 2006, 20:42
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 318
Joined: 11-November 03
Member No.: 9786



QUOTE (Never_Again @ Feb 24 2006, 11:30 AM)
I always wondered why some posters here habitually quote previous posts in their entirety - sometimes half a page of text or even more, often to add just a one-line reply.

Such "completist" quoting could be understandable on Usenet, where sooner or later all posts expire; but here all posts are archived and usually are on the same page as the reply anyway. Moreover, even on Usenet it is considered good netiquette to only quote the passages you reply to directly and leave everything else out ("trimming quotes"). Why is it not done here? TOS 11 deals with .sig abuse already, why not with quoting abuse too? It can be very annoying to have to scroll through pages of the same posts repeated over and over with little new content, especially when several such posters go on a quoting binge in the same thread.

I think I have figured out why they do it, at last. Apparently, scrolling down to the bottom/top of the page (quickly accomplished by Ctrl+End/Ctrl+Home) and clicking the Add Reply button (instead of the Reply button right under a post) is too much work for some, as is trimming the quotes. IMO, this practice is careless at best and rude at worst, as it wastes readers' time and creates pages and pages of useless ballast/junk.

I propose hereby that TOS 11 be amended to cover this issue, and the moderators remove redundant quotes from posts and warn repeat offenders.

Same goes for those who appear to regularly post when drunk/stoned, because their posts have so many misspellings/typos as to hardly resemble English. Of course, I am aware that nobody's perfect (much less so myself), and for many posters here English is not the first language. But the vast majority manage just fine (if not better than the average American smile.gif. And when I see something like

QUOTE
totakl off-topci

why is ther no smart interface ofr optical drives whcih give feedback on the level of c2 erros found while reading.
or
QUOTE
Deem like you are doin the typical mistakte thinking frequence respons and quality goes hand in hand..they dont....

I wonder where the mods are. Is that considered more acceptable than the so-called "l33t speak"?

Yeah I no I prolly need to stop worring abot such trifles taek it EZ get wit the program andbe liek every body else life iz to short blahblahblah ...
Or maybe not.

<edit: formatting>
*




WTF do ya mean?


--------------------
http://www.glop.org/starforce/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
skelly831
post Feb 24 2006, 21:19
Post #3





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 782
Joined: 11-April 05
From: México
Member No.: 21361



my $2 pesos:

I think quoting whole posts is annoying, yes, I do it sometimes, as do a lot of people here. But if the original post is a couple of lines long and the answer is also a couple of lines long, quoting up to three or four times is not so annoying, but doing it like fairyliquidizer did above is over the top.

As for the bad grammar and typos, if a poster sees that he has commited some errors, he should edit his post and try to write as correctly as possible to the best of his abilities, because a lot of people here aren't native english speakers (myself included). With all the technical mumbo-jumbo being tossed around here, the smallest typo can mean someone won't be able to run LAME or OGGENC, et cetera, correctly.


--------------------
we was young an' full of beans
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Feb 24 2006, 22:52
Post #4





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



QUOTE (Never_Again @ Feb 24 2006, 07:30PM)
TOS 11 deals with .sig abuse already, why not with quoting abuse too?
This sounds like a sensible and achievable suggestion to me.

QUOTE (Never_Again @ Feb 24 2006, 07:30 PM)
I wonder where the mods are. Is that considered more acceptable than the so-called "l33t speak"?
I don't know, very difficult to call. How much censorship do you want? Your post will make me consider moderating over-jealous quoters in the future, but editing other members' post should not be taken lightly. I certainly don't take it lightly. If I edit a member's post to remove an unnecessary quote I will need to take real care that the post still maintains relevancy, or retain portions of the quote to maintain the original intention. This all takes time, and the ability to completely understand the poster's intentions.

If I edit a post purely because it has poor grammar and spelling I need to ensure that I have fully understood the original poster's intentions, which is not easy if it is badly written, otherwise I run the risk of perverting their intentions.

I find poorly written posts frustrating also, but I find the prospect of moderators editing less academic members' posts in a way that they see fit quite abhorent.


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xmixahlx
post Feb 25 2006, 00:44
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 1394
Joined: 20-December 01
From: seattle
Member No.: 693



moderating posts because of spelling/grammar is ridiculous...

also, quoting complete posts to respond to a question within the (entire) quote is annoying...

however, making rules based on how people interact may not be a good thing. for instance, are you going to police the haiku response?

people not using periods?

people using question marks too much?

not using words correctly?

??

??


eheh
later


--------------------
RareWares/Debian :: http://www.rarewares.org/debian.html
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Never_Again
post Feb 25 2006, 01:29
Post #6





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 698
Joined: 31-March 04
From: NYC
Member No.: 13152



I don't advocate editing typos, spelling and grammar; it would be an exercise in futility given the volume of posts and is a ridiculous notion anyway. What I had in mind is keeping in check the disregard (intentional or not) by some posters as to whether their posts are readable and easily understood.

Thank you, Synthetic Soul, for your conscientious take on the quoting issue; but I don't expect you to take it on single-handedly. That's why I submitted this proposal for discussion in hope that the admin and moderation team would recognize the issue and work out appropriate measures to deal with it.

I don't support censorship, nor do I want to seem a grammar/spelling Nazi. However, I firmly believe there is a difference between

a) a freedom to express your opinion
b) a freedom to not care if you sputter your audience with spit while you are expressing your opinion

<edit: a typo. heh>

This post has been edited by Never_Again: Feb 25 2006, 01:32
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
gameplaya15143
post Feb 26 2006, 03:24
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 484
Joined: 8-January 06
From: Earth
Member No.: 26978



QUOTE (Never_Again @ Feb 24 2006, 02:30 PM)
I always wondered why some posters here habitually quote previous posts in their entirety - sometimes half a page of text or even more, often to add just a one-line reply.
*

That is most annoying. If the quoted, quoted, quoted, quoted, quote actually had relevence to the responce then I wouldn't be annoyed (but then again, thats what the whole thread is for blink.gif .. i'm referring to topic relevence here)

It would be nice if more people would preview their posts rolleyes.gif


--------------------
Vorbis-q0-lowpass99
lame3.93.1-q5-V9-k-nspsytune
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Firon
post Feb 26 2006, 07:08
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 830
Joined: 3-November 05
Member No.: 25526



In many cases, quoting at all just isn't necessary. Simply saying "person's name:" will suffice for many people.

Synthetic Soul: One of the things that bothers me especially is the quoting pyramids people do, where they quote a quote of a quote of a quote and it's like 3 pages long! Really, that just makes it a lot harder to read the thread. It's also equally pointless when people quote the post -right- before theirs, instead of just saying their name to direct their reply at them.

Fixing grammar or spelling goes a little too far (unless it's in the topic, where I think it may be OK if the current topic makes no sense whatsoever), though when someone types with all caps or asks a question with a hundred punctuation marks at the end, that might need trimming down.

This post has been edited by Firon: Feb 26 2006, 07:09
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Aankhen
post Feb 28 2006, 12:36
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 24-February 06
Member No.: 28023



QUOTE (Never_Again @ Feb 25 2006, 01:00 AM)
Moreover, even on Usenet it is considered good netiquette to only quote the passages you reply to directly and leave everything else out ("trimming quotes"). Why is it not done here?
*

There you have the problem. "Netiquette" is a foreign word to 99%* of all Internet users. You'll find anti-social (read: bad Netiquette) behaviour everywhere on the 'Net, be it Usenet, forums such as this one, mailing lists, or personal e-mail.

This is not an easily solved problem: it can't be fixed by simply tweaking server options. The solution to this is educating users. I think that intervention by mods—in the form of editing posts to reduce quotes to only the relevant portions—would be a step in the right direction, but how feasible is it?

On the other hand, in my humble opinion, editing posts to correct errors is not the right solution when it comes to poor grammar or spelling. Perhaps adding a small notice ("Editing this post might help people to better understand what you're saying" or something to that effect) would serve as a virtual nudge?

N.B.: I am a relatively new member of these forums. Therefore, I suggest you take what I say with a pinch of salt. smile.gif

* Disclaimer: this number may be hyperbole. Quote at your own risk!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sebastian Mares
post Mar 29 2006, 08:17
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 3637
Joined: 14-May 03
From: Bad Herrenalb
Member No.: 6613



I also find long quotes annoying and was wondering if it wouldn't be a good idea to stop quote embedding (having quotes inside quotes).


--------------------
http://listening-tests.hydrogenaudio.org/sebastian/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th December 2014 - 15:42