As seen here.
MK did meanwhile change it a little bit. But even so, should there be a rule against doing that?
Printable View
As seen here.
MK did meanwhile change it a little bit. But even so, should there be a rule against doing that?
In my opinion, this rule is the one that is relevant:
Quote:
7. Messages whose intent is to "Flame," or purposely insult or incite another person, or any portion of a post that "flames" will be deleted.
Absolutely. There needs to be an FCC rule. You should phone your congressperson about it: the US Capitol Switchboard numbers are 202-224-3121, 888-818-6641 and 888-355-3588.
Actually, it already is grounds for libel. However, your example is a weak one -- even without the "inner feelings" qualification, I am confident I would win my case, vis. this was obviously NOT an attempt to fool anyone. Unfortunately, laserlight has removed the evidence, but I would note that what the post consisted of was this:
- an actual quote
- a caption "what the OP really meant"
- a fake quote obviously mimicing the original quote
In this case, the OP was in fact Mario F. No judge on the planet would claim I was trying to mislead anyone.
NB. I was not trying to incite or insult anyone either, but I acknowledge it could be interpreted as an "attempt to insight". Kind of a shame about the deletions; some of Mario's cleverest stuff was in there :p
Exactly. If you were trying to fool someone, you would not have quoted the original text. Since you quoted the original text and then presented the paraphrase in a quote block under Mario F.'s username, it is clear that you were trying to incite Mario F. to make a negative response such that his thread would be closed... which was your actual intention.Quote:
Originally Posted by MK27
What's wrong with misquoting?Quote:
Originally Posted by laserlight
Actually no, the whole thing was a joke. My subsequent comment that "I guess someone should close this thread!" was a reference to the fact that Mario started the thread because another threadQuote:
Originally Posted by laserlight
http://cboard.cprogramming.com/gener...ame-ideas.html
about word games was closed at the request of the OP (in this case, MartinThatcher) because of Mario F. Which I totally respect Mario for wanting to explain himself. And I did not want his thread closed at all -- I was enjoying it.
No names were mentioned in the reason for the closure. The OP never mentioned anyone as the sole reason for the request just that the thread was diverging away from its original intent. It was not that big of a deal at the time.Quote:
about word games was closed at the request of the OP (in this case, MartinThatcher) because of Mario F.
The evidence is still in the database, only a superadmin can truly delete a post permanently.Quote:
Originally Posted by MK27
Instead of complaining about the post to a moderator, I took matters into my own hands and forever placed the troll in my ignore list. If you ask me about whether it is right or wrong to purposely misquote someone, my answer is that I don't like rules. Too many rules give me the creeps. I prefer if there is room for people to be human, which includes two things:
- their ability to be a complete idiot
- their ability to correct that
I'm not sure what the big deal is but I am positive a new rule is not going to fix the problem. Rules aren't something you make up when you have a personal problem with someone else. That's really freaking petty.
I want to make a rule about no new rules, though. They're perfect and timeless as they are.
If you're too stupid to tell the difference between the "fake quote" and the real one, then you need to get off of the internet. Anyone here ever been to the WoW forums? Ever see "fixt" posted? Yeah. You know what I'm talking about.
If you're that stupid, get off of the internet.
Quzah.
I'm more inclined to prohibit crap, pointless polls.
I'm aware of the intended joke, and I don't have a problem with the misquoting part of it either. I was just curios what your opinions where. Actually, I expected more people on the bottom 2 options.
For environments like this, I kind of like Mario's philosophy. But I like Rule 7 too. ;)
Fixed it for youQuote:
Originally Posted by quzah
how the ........ is this supposed to be funny?
________________________
Please contact me
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
It's not. That part was taken out.Quote:
Originally Posted by ennavakillesal
____________________
[More spam testing I see.]*
*ennavakillesal is including email addresses so they can check if their bots are able to pull addresses from posts for the purpose of spamming.
I don't get it either.
As a rule of thumb, it may be a good idea to keep post #2 free of dots. ;)