Community Chat

[mistriTsquirrel]

On another thread, I posted this:

mistriTsqu­irrel03/24/2014 at 12:37 AM10307 PostsRegistered 7/17/2010Purgatory, USA

On 3/23/2014 azterry! said:

On 3/23/2014 occasional rain said:

I'm not interested in the K clan but many seem to be. So, who is to say she doesn't deserve to be on the cover? The point of the cover of any magazine is to sell more of them. This isn't charity or a tip, it's business. Of course Kim shouldn't have turned it down.

ITA

Kate Middleton's only claim to fame is that she married a prince.

She has appeared on numerous covers and is given adulation for her alleged fashion sense. Other than her "princess duties" she has no remarkable talent.

Is her fashion sense really even her own? She probably has stylists, yes?

Not that she isn't a lovely young woman, but you're right...she's not a celebrity based on merit.

___________________________________________________________________________

Somehow, it got changed in the quoting process...

Lavinia03/24/2014 at 12:41 AM632 PostsRegistered 3/20/2013

Well then maybe Kim should either get a stylist or start listening to someone because she usually looks awful at least 90 percent of the time. Kim does not even have the "talent" to look good in clothes.

On 3/23/2014 Vogue said:

On 3/23/2014 azterry! said:

On 3/23/2014 occasional rain said:

I'm not interested in the K clan but many seem to be. So, who is to say she doesn't deserve to be on the cover? The point of the cover of any magazine is to sell more of them. This isn't charity or a tip, it's business. Of course Kim shouldn't have turned it down.

ITA

Kate Middleton's only claim to fame is that she married a prince.

She has appeared on numerous covers and is given adulation for her alleged fashion sense. Other than her "princess duties" she has no remarkable talent.

Is her fashion sense really even her own? She probably has stylists, yes?

Not that she isn't a lovely young woman, but you're right...she's not a celebrity based on merit.

____________________________________________________________________________

Somehow, my nic was changed to "Vogue," and the date of my reply was changed to 3/23 (underlined above, along with my own words, which were wrongly attributed to "Vogue").

Would someone please explain to me how that happened???

[mistriTsquirrel]

Sorry I couldn't copy the actual boxes around the quotes to make it clearer who said what; these quotes were taken from the first page of this thread: http://community.qvc.com/forums/viewpoints/topic/439905/pagenumber/1/index.aspx

[bikerbabe]

Mistri,

I went to the thread and tested it. When you quote, you can edit anything, incldung posters names and dates. Not good. I never realized that could be done.

[dooBdoo]

Hi, mistri! I’ll take a shot at it. When using certain mobile devices, particularly older models, the only way to quote is by inserting your comments at the top of the quotes. When this is done, sometimes the person inadvertently edits the portion that was supposed to be quoted and not edited. It appears this is what's happening with Lavinia. My guess is she somehow managed to get the magazine name in the place of your nickname.

[occasionalrain]

I noticed earlier that the responses were appearing above the quoted post which caused posts to be attributed to the wrong poster. If you remember two days in a row they closed the BB at 10PM for maintenance so this must be the result. I wonder if they get their techies from some junior college in Philly.

[mistriTsquirrel]

On 3/24/2014 bikerbabe said:

Mistri,

I went to the thread and tested it. When you quote, you can edit anything, incldung posters names and dates. Not good. I never realized that could be done.

I didn't either...and I don't like it.

But I can't imagine why someone would change both my nic and the date of my reply in this particular instance; there was no reason to. That's why I was wondering if there was a glitch.

[bikerbabe]

On 3/24/2014 occasional rain said:

I noticed earlier that the responses were appearing above the quoted post which caused posts to be attributed to the wrong poster. If you remember two days in a row they closed the BB at 10PM for maintenance so this must be the result. I wonder if they get their techies from some junior college in Philly.

[dooBdoo]

On 3/24/2014 occasional rain said:

I noticed earlier that the responses were appearing above the quoted post which caused posts to be attributed to the wrong poster. If you remember two days in a row they closed the BB at 10PM for maintenance so this must be the result. I wonder if they get their techies from some junior college in Philly.

It's not the changes they made here -- it's an ongoing problem in using older devices (usually those that can no longer install new software updates). As time passes, websites can only be expected to accommodate so many old software versions.

[dooBdoo]

On 3/24/2014 mistriTsquirrel said:

On 3/24/2014 bikerbabe said:

Mistri,

I went to the thread and tested it. When you quote, you can edit anything, incldung posters names and dates. Not good. I never realized that could be done.

I didn't either...and I don't like it.

But I can't imagine why someone would change both my nic and the date of my reply in this particular instance; there was no reason to. That's why I was wondering if there was a glitch.

I'd still say it was just an editing error she made.

[bikerbabe]

I agree it's likely a weird error in this case.