quote:

You can also highlight text and click reply.

Well I'll be darned. Now that's a hack I didn't know about. Just tried it and it works just fine.

You sir, just saved me some time.

quote:

You can also highlight text and click reply. The highlighted text will be quoted. It won’t show the author, however.

Ah, another pet peeve of mine, quoting without showing the author. Not nice.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

You can also highlight text and click reply. The highlighted text will be quoted. It won’t show the author, however.

Ah, another pet peeve of mine, quoting without showing the author. Not nice.

I don't see a problem with it. Don't necessarily need the author if just addressing a small point.

^^^
I think it really comes down to context. When focusing on a forum member's opinion, an attitude, an idea...say you are in a debate or argument, then absolutely, it's both respectful and helps to avoid confusion by including the member's screen name. %100 agree...

... but, let's say your quoted comment isn't focused on the member, but the concept/ idea they posted and/ or your quoted comment is in regards to an article they posted. I don't think it's necessary to include the member's name in that context. In fact, if my quoted comment is focused on the concept or article, I try to remind myself to remove the name from my quote as a courtesy, so both the quoted member, as well as others in the thread, don't think I'm singling out the member for criticism or being argumentative.

I'm certainly not perfect at it, but I believe context matters.

^^^^

I agree with that.

I’m lucky, I don’t know how to do any of that stuff…or just old & don’t truly care.

Here's another scenario where I'd prefer a member's name be removed from a post.

In a few instances I've posted an interesting article for discussion and another member quotes a part of the article with my name as the quoted source.

The comment or observation is great, maybe fantastic, powerful, and worth highlighting or discussing... the problem is, I ain't that bright. It's not my comment, but with my name attached it looks like I said it.

I'd prefer not to be either given credit or damnation for a comment that's not mine.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
... but I believe context matters.

Thank you.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
The comment or observation is great, maybe fantastic, powerful, and worth highlighting or discussing... the problem is, I ain't that bright. It's not my comment, but with my name attached it looks like I said it.

Agreed. That's a perfect example.

I typically use "no username" quotes in one of two scenarios:

1) I'm quoting from an article that someone posted, since it's not their words.

2) I'm posting separate individual replies to multiple sections/sentences of a single person's post. I'll attribute the first quoted portion and post my thoughts/response to that section, and then with each subsequent quote and response I'll leave the username out of the quote, because it's simply a continuation of quotes from the same initially attributed person's post.

quote:

Originally posted by frayedends:

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

You can also highlight text and click reply. The highlighted text will be quoted. It won’t show the author, however.

Ah, another pet peeve of mine, quoting without showing the author. Not nice.

I don't see a problem with it. Don't necessarily need the author if just addressing a small point.

Sometimes it's desirable to hunt down the greater context.

I agree with Q.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
In a few instances I've posted an interesting article for discussion and another member quotes a part of the article with my name as the quoted source.

The proper way to do such things, maintain the proper context, is double-quoting. E.g.:

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:

quote:

This might be something from an article MDS quoted.

Uh oh... We've got a problem.

One faction hates nested quotes. One faction insists on nested quotes as the "proper" way when quoting someone's post that includes an article.

We're going to have to meet after school to settle this beef once and for all.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
...
Thank you.

While you are most certainly welcome, there is no need to thank me, because Lord knows I've learned from you.

@ RogueJSK

I was kinda scratching my head over that myself.

quote:

Ah, another pet peeve of mine, quoting without showing the author. Not nice.

Me too, cause then I have to scroll around to see who posted it…

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Uh oh... We've got a problem.

One faction hates nested quotes. One faction insists on nested quotes as the "proper" way when quoting someone's post that includes an article.

My impression is it isn't quoting that's the problem, but, excessive quoting. Particularly if the quoted material includes images.

I generally try to quote just enough to retain context for any comments I have or points I wish to make.

I bet some of that is hall monitors wanting to memorialize the OP so they can't go back and edit original.

Not saying there are any of those type here, just other places, you know......

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:
I bet some of that is hall monitors wanting to memorialize the OP so they can't go back and edit original.

Not saying there are any of those type here, just other places, you know......

I've seen a number of threads where the OP decided to change his tune and deny he'd ever posted "XXX" and it turned out somebody had quoted him. Kind of embarrassing for the OP.

While we're discussing when to keep or omit member names, a thought occurred to me that I'd like you all to check me on.

From day 1 on the forum I've never had notifications. I signed up with a company email account that was about to be deactivated, and really didn't think I wanted an in-box full of notifications anyways.

Never having had notifications, I may be off here, but I am assuming that if a member is quoted in a post by name, that a notification is generated that goes to that member. Is that how it works? Or, are notifications only generated when a thread has been bumped with an additional posted comment?

^^^

I've never signed up for notifications either. Have no idea how they work and the email I registered with was on my ex-wife's business domain. Back then you couldn't use a free email like gmail to register. If notifications use the registered address I wouldn't get them anyhow.

Most of the time when I'm reading a thread I don't even see the author of posts. That's because I use my phone a lot and I have to zoom in so much I can't see who posted.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
Or, are notifications only generated when a thread has been bumped with an additional posted comment?

This is how it works.