BBS quoting/forking etiquette

I encountered a big upset today, when I took a question somebody asked me and forked it to another topic. I feel badly to have angered some people, but I feel worse that those concerned said that I should have known that this was obviously a horrible thing to do. It is a situation that I have, in all honesty, never encountered here before. So I want to ask what you all think.

This is not about the topic or the individuals involved. I am not trying to “lawyer” the perceived merits of the deleted topic. What I am interested in is a discussion of the etiquette behind the complaints of those concerned, so that I can understand what sort of transgression they were upset about.

I know that some of us can be quite verbose, including me. So I was happy to encounter the “reply as linked topic” feature, which I try to use to prevent in-depth replies which veer off of the main topic from derailing it for other participants. Nobody has ever complained to me about this before. But today, I forked off of a busy topic when a few people started grilling me about a very specific thing which hinted at a whole other big discussion. When I did, the person who I quoted - who was asking me a question - explained that they wanted me to not quote them, and asserted their right to not be part of the discourse. So, I did as they asked. I removed their quote and name, and added a bit of text to the place where the quote was to explain why it was edited. This again I have been told is good etiquette, to explain generally why edits were made. I simply said to the effect that the poster chose to not be involved, and I edited it as per their wishes. And I stated in very general terms what the context of the new topic was, since the original post was now gone.

I got some nasty-ish posts about this, suggesting that I should have known that quoting somebody who didn’t want to be quoted is a flaggable offense. Is it? Do people here usually ask permission explicitly before they quote someone? It wasn’t a PM, or taken out of context. I edited my OP as they asked me to. As a courtesy. Do I have an obligation to not quote somebody when there OT question still exists in the other topic for all to see? If I remove their quote, should the topic still be deleted anyway?

I sent a PM to the active complainer in the topic, and the mod who PMd me to not do it again. That’s fine, but nobody even made clear what the infringement was.

I suppose that it possible that this happens every so often, but I was not aware of it perhaps due to offending topics getting eaten. But it seemed like a unique occurrence to my experience, only to be told that I should know better.

What do you think? Are there special times when it is/isn’t okay to quote somebody? If the quote is removed, should the whole topic then cease to exist? Is creating a separate topic without the involvement of the other participants better? Aiiieee! I hate it when people tell me that their rules are important enough to punish me over, but explain what precisely those rules are!


Sometimes I go for a walk outside and drink deep the crisp winter air as it plays upon the reeds.


I think you need to step away from the keyboard for maybe an hour.

You’re not being punished. That is YOUR construct, please do not dump responsibility for it on us. Individually or collectiely. That’s on you. If you don’t point a finger, it is remarkable how few people will point one at you.

If you don’t want to be publicly called disruptive, stop taking everydiscussion to the nth degree.

Admit when you are incorrect occasionally,

And stop telling anyone what they think, ever.

Since you asked.


I try to follow the sage words of Ice Cube*:

[Quote]‘Cause the boyz in the hood are always hard
Come talkin’ that trash and we’ll pull your card
Knowin’ nothin’ in life but to be legit
Don’t quote me, boy, I ain’t said shit[/Quote]

*Written by; performed by Easy-E.

1 Like

Oh, and have enough class to recognize that the other party in your dispute is not drama queening it up in BBS threads, which is a fair characterization of this thread, as well as the other one that the luck dragon ate already.

Please @popobawa4u. Chill friend.

Basically it is this:

1 Like

Without knowing the context or content I would say, no.

They are being a big baby and you shouldn’t care.

*rubs hands

Now let’s find out how insensitive I am being.


Wait. WTF!?!



I am seriously going outside myself to go figure out how to make one of these. That looks remarkably like the actual view from here!

1 Like

Take video

Layer of one still frame

Cut around motion you want from video

Put it in new layer over still frame



Oh gods I love that one so much!


Back off, dude. He asked – admittedly at length – but very nicely and neutrally.

Your responding in asshole-mode does not help the situation much, except to start to paint pictures for some.

1 Like

Pictures of assholes?

Only artistic if painted in the renaissance style.


which is a fair characterization of your posts in this thread.

1 Like

This started in anothe thread which he has described here in a ‘hero of the story’ way.

Asshole mode intentional, but also getting old. Glad there is a thread for it.

1 Like

I suppose I am complaining incorrectly! What an object lesson I am being!


What an utter crock of shite. You were the one saying that people should flag my posts, whilst offering no justification of how this relates to the forum ruies. I started this topic so that I could get the perspective of other people, the ones who are mature enough to not make every statement they don’t like into a personal problem.

People can call me whatever they like. But it was a new topic, and the only replies to it were OT personal trolling. How is that “the nth degree”?

I have zero interest in people persuading each other of anything. We can audit each others reasoning, but neither you nor I know what anybody else “is”. It is simply an exchange of ideas, not an exercise in emotional incontinence.

Doesn’t telling me to stop imply that I do so? I ask people what they think, and they usually don’t say. The closest I get is by offering conditional statements. Such as IF you think this, THEN perhaps that. Stating that they are conditional speculations is not the same as actually claiming to speak for others.

That’s not at all what I asked. Try crowbarring your reading comprehension out of your ass and learn to parse direct questions.

I’m not going to engage you in good faith at this point. Sorry! Don’t let me waste another moment of your time, please!

1 Like

In good faith, I have not once said that in this context. Not today. Not here, not even in the prior topic that @Falcor ate. There too you misattributed something to someone and were willing to go to the nth degree to not own it That was the other user, the one who asked you to stop. . [that was not correct, that was in a PM someone sent me telling me to also flag you].

I believe I said your behavior was red-flaggy.

I frankly will not do the work of further sorting fact from fiction with you over this. It’s not my work. Conversation with you gets really impossible quick, becase you want people to admit their errors, but you set no real example, as I see it.

But I’m just one guy. And an outlier as well.

1 Like

Popo, can I ask: Have you ever been convinced to change your mind about anything you were originally sure of after coming into contact with someone else’s thoughts on the matter?

Real question :tm: