# Epidemic of Pointless Quotes



## cirrus

Am I just getting old and grumpy or is there an epidemic of pointless quotes going on? Checking various threads today I noticed several newbies either quoting previous statements with no comment or change or rehashing the same material into stale threads.   Is there a policy on this?

As an example of what I mean look at post 27 in this thread.

Bah humbug! 



Steve


----------



## cuchuflete

Greetings Cirrus,

Pointless quotes, or quotations of an entire, long post, just to refer to a single sentence or short phrase, are seen with annoying frequency.  Many people do it.  It can impede, rather than promote, useful and friendly conversation.

There is no rule against it, nor is there likely to be one.  Enforcement of a sensible rule, if such a thing were possible, would turn mods into copy editors.  We can only ask that common sense be used, and that if, for example, one wishes to reply to a single comment in a lengthy post, that the sentence be copied and pasted thus:  
"Is there a policy on this?" or


> Is there a policy on this?


Repeating what has been said over and over again?  Hmmmmmm.... Yes.  That happens too.  I won't name the more notorious threads, to protect the identities of those who obviously haven't read what was written before they joined a thread.  Still, further assent from more perspectives may be useful to emphasize a point.(He said, grasping at straws!)

Some of the mods have recently discussed these problems, and instead of more rules, have decided to post a sticky with something like "best practices" to discourage such things.  This would be a wonderful solution, especially for those who take the trouble to read the stickies, Guidelines, and Rules/FAQ.  
A few such foreros have been spotted over the years.  

How does one promote common sense?

Your advice, and that of others, is invited.

Regards,
cuchu


----------



## fenixpollo

Post 27 in that thread does not contain a quote. 


cirrus said:


> Am I just getting old and grumpy or is there an epidemic of pointless quotes going on? Checking various threads today I noticed several newbies either quoting previous statements with no comment or change or rehashing the same material into stale threads.   Is there a policy on this?


 As far as the practice of quoting previous statements with no comment, I think that sometimes, newbies are confused by the mechanics of posting a reply and so they accidentally post a reply with only a quote.  This is the only reason I can think of why someone would quote without typing anything of their own. Sometimes I am truly baffled by what must go through people's minds when they post.

If spurious quotation is on the rise, it might be due to the multiquote feature of the recent upgrade.

Just some thoughts.  Trying to make sense of it all.


----------



## ireney

I am a bit suspicious and cynic by nature so I see it (though I admit there might be exceptions) as a "roundabout" way to say "I agree with what whomever said" or "That was funny" without having your post deleted as being chatty.


----------



## TrentinaNE

I think there may sometimes be a bit of, um, laziness involved. When typing a response, people may find it easier to invoke the quote function so that the original message appears at the top of the response box, rather than having to scroll down to see the prior message. Perfectly understandable -- *as a temporary aide*! But neglecting to then delete the quoted message from the text box before hitting the "Submit reply" button just clutters things up needlessly.

As cuchu noted, it's an irritation, but probably not worth instituting a "rule."

Other thoughts?

Elisabetta


----------



## fenixpollo

TrentinaNE said:


> I think there may sometimes be a bit of, um, laziness involved. When typing a response, people may find it easier to invoke the quote function so that the original message appears at the top of the response box, rather than having to scroll down to see the prior message. Perfectly understandable -- *as a temporary aide*! But neglecting to then delete the quoted message from the text box before hitting the "Submit reply" button just clutters things up needlessly.
> 
> As cuchu noted, it's an irritation, but probably not worth instituting a "rule."


 Wait a minute, Liz... are you saying that including a quote in my post and replying below it is, by its nature, annoying? 

This is the best way to quote, as far as I'm concerned. I want people to see your post that provoked my words, so I don't delete the quote of your text. I want them to read your words first and to know to whom I'm responding, so I answer _below_ the quote.

The result is a more clear post and a better flow of ideas in threads that can be disjointed by multiple conversations in the same thread.


----------



## TrentinaNE

To clarify, often people quote an entire _lengthy_ prior message when they are responding to one small aspect of that post, such as a better way to translate/render a particular word or short expression from one language to another, or even just to correct a typo. That is the practice that I find annoying -- _needless _quotation.  

BTW, I'm Elisabetta/Elizabeth, but never Liz.


----------



## fenixpollo

TrentinaNE said:


> To clarify, often people quote an entire _lengthy_ prior message when they are responding to one small aspect of that post, such as a better way to translate/render a particular word or short expression from one language to another, or even just to correct a typo. That is the practice that I find annoying -- _needless _quotation.
> 
> BTW, I'm Elisabetta/Elizabeth, but never Liz.


 Thanks for the explanation.  I was just trying to clarify what you define as "needless".  

I did, you'll notice, take the liberty to omit the last 4 lines of your original post when I quoted it.   Like you, I prefer it when people quote only the pertinent parts of a post. 

Sorry for also taking liberties with your name, Elisabetta.


----------



## cuchuflete

fenixpollo said:


> Like you, I prefer it when people quote only the pertinent parts of a post.


And if there are only impertinent parts, is it ok to quote the lot?


----------



## panjandrum

cuchuflete said:


> [...] is it ok to quote the lot?


The more perspicacious might recognise the [...] in the above quote.  I use this a great deal when quoting to indicate that I have deleted chunks of the original post here.

It's a strange archaic phenomenon, I suspect, but some of us are more likely to quote selectively while others quote the whole post.  Some of us seem to think that even the e-copy costs.


----------



## papillon

cuchuflete said:


> Greetings Cirrus,
> 
> Pointless quotes, or quotations of an entire, long post, just to refer to a single sentence or short phrase, are seen with annoying frequency.  Many people do it.  It can impede, rather than promote, useful and friendly conversation.
> 
> There is no rule against it, nor is there likely to be one.  Enforcement of a sensible rule, if such a thing were possible, would turn mods into copy editors.  We can only ask that common sense be used, and that if, for example, one wishes to reply to a single comment in a lengthy post, that the sentence be copied and pasted thus:
> "Is there a policy on this?" or
> Repeating what has been said over and over again?  Hmmmmmm.... Yes.  That happens too.  I won't name the more notorious threads, to protect the identities of those who obviously haven't read what was written before they joined a thread.  Still, further assent from more perspectives may be useful to emphasize a point.(He said, grasping at straws!)
> 
> Some of the mods have recently discussed these problems, and instead of more rules, have decided to post a sticky with something like "best practices" to discourage such things.  This would be a wonderful solution, especially for those who take the trouble to read the stickies, Guidelines, and Rules/FAQ.
> A few such foreros have been spotted over the years.
> 
> How does one promote common sense?
> 
> Your advice, and that of others, is invited.
> 
> Regards,
> cuchu





TrentinaNE said:


> I think there may sometimes be a bit of, um, laziness involved. When typing a response, people may find it easier to invoke the quote function so that the original message appears at the top of the response box, rather than having to scroll down to see the prior message. Perfectly understandable -- *as a temporary aide*! But neglecting to then delete the quoted message from the text box before hitting the "Submit reply" button just clutters things up needlessly.
> 
> As cuchu noted, it's an irritation, but probably not worth instituting a "rule."
> 
> Other thoughts?
> 
> Elisabetta





TrentinaNE said:


> To clarify, often people quote an entire _lengthy_ prior message when they are responding to one small aspect of that post, such as a better way to translate/render a particular word or short expression from one language to another, or even just to correct a typo. That is the practice that I find annoying -- _needless _quotation.
> 
> BTW, I'm Elisabetta/Elizabeth, but never Liz.


This is a very interesting thread!


----------



## Etcetera

panjandrum said:


> It's a strange archaic phenomenon, I suspect, but some of us are more likely to quote selectively while others quote the whole post.  Some of us seem to think that even the e-copy costs.


Quoting selectively is definitely more convenient, but it takes some time to add all the tags needed.  So I suppose some people just have too little time to do it, so they prefer to quote the whole text and then write their reply.


----------



## Trina

panjandrum said:


> The more perspicacious might recognise the [...] in the above quote. [...]



As a practice ,I am selective with how much I retain in the quote but have not been perspicacious enough to note the use of [...] or use this myself. This, however will change!
Quick query: Now, if I am retaining the first part of the quote only, do I put the [...] at the end like I did above or at the beginning? (in other words, does it work like the apostrophe?)

Edit: I t works like an apostrophe. Right?


----------



## ojyram

RE: This is a very interesting thread! with all it's quotes!

Best laugh I've had all night.  Thank you so much,Papillion.


----------



## lsp

Etcetera said:


> ... it takes some time to add all the tags needed. ...


What additional tags have to be added manually?


----------



## Etcetera

I usually quote the whole post and then, if I want to answer to some points separately, I divide the quote into parts by adding tags <quote> and </quote> where necessary.


----------



## lsp

Ahhh. Thanks for explaining (I thought I was missing something  ).

By the way, as Etcetera and I have just done, it is not even necessary to quote a reply at all if you are the very next poster.


----------



## Etcetera

You're welcome. 


> it is not even necessary to quote a reply at all if you are the very next poster.


When there's quite a few forer@s online, it can be so. But you can never be absolutely sure that you'll be the next poster! It happened two or three times that while I was writing an answer to a reply without any quoting, someone posted their reply. As a result, it was not so easy to understand what was my reply doing there, and it made me feel a bit uncomfortable...


----------



## panjandrum

Etcetera said:


> [...] So I suppose some people just have too little time to do it, so they prefer to quote the whole text and then write their reply.


That says to me that they think their time is more valuable than mine - for I am going to have to scan through the quoted post to see what part of it they are commenting on - if any.

Selective quote - as I have done above - takes only a moment. Select the unnecessary text and type [...]. 

If I want to quote several chunks separately, I copy and paste the whole post then use the 




icon to make the bits I want look like quotes


----------



## papillon

panjandrum said:


> If I want to quote several chunks separately, I copy and paste the whole post then use the
> 
> 
> 
> icon to make the bits I want look like quotes


Panjandrum, you may have just solved the future problem with half of annoyingly long quotes!

So that's what this button is for! I bet if we had a poll, half the people wouldn't know the button existed. I too, like Etcetera, used to copy paste the 





> comments. Now, with the help of the magic button, I'll be able to navigate piece-wise quotations with the nimbleness of waiter rushing a plate of scallops through a crowded restaurant to table #11.


----------



## Etcetera

panjandrum said:


> If I want to quote several chunks separately, I copy and paste the whole post then use the
> 
> 
> 
> icon to make the bits I want look like quotes


That's what I always do.  For me, it's really more convenient to answer to separate points than to right a looong reply to a looong quote.


----------

