Stay in Touch
Get sneak previews of special offers & upcoming events delivered to your inbox.
Sign in
06-05-2016 09:03 PM
@jaxs mom wrote:So you started a thread just to complain about the moderators deciding that posts were off topic.
No, I started a thread asking why posters think discussions get shut down when facts are introduced.
06-05-2016 09:10 PM
This post has been removed by QVC because it's unkind
06-05-2016 09:13 PM
It seems to be, as many have already clearly stated, that some start at and stay at where they are, and perhaps even assume others know less or the same as they do. Some look at new facts and/or even new thoughts that are introduced as an opportunity to research further but some do not.
Whether or not one's opinion is changed shouldn't be important. It's whether someone is willing to "check things out" and maybe spend some time with thoughts, ideas, or knowledge that is not the same as familiar thoughts, ideas, or knowledge, even if it's only to understand others better.
06-05-2016 09:13 PM
@IamMrsG, before your explanation I just found it a curiosity because I was under the impression that only names were being removed but in light of your admission that you sometimes remove parts of a post that are showing up as a quote I do find that troublesome.
Without the name of the quoted poster it is sometimes difficult to find the post if one wants to see the context in which the quoted post was made.
Removing parts of a post that you find superfluous to your point is disturbing to me. Readers have no way of knowing that part of a quote has been removed and the meaning/intent of the original post can be lost with the remainder being misconstrued.
Doing either in private posts in a closed conversation is likely to have little impact on the conversation because all parties would know who was involved and what was actually said. On an open board doing either and more particularly doing both can lead to long lasting misunderstandings and misconceptions. It is a disaster waiting to happen.
06-05-2016 09:35 PM
@IamMrsG wrote:
@Marp wrote:@IamMrsG, I have an off topic curiosity question. I've noticed that often when you quote a post the name of the poster you are quoting has been removed. If you don't mind sharing why do you remove the poster's name?
@Marp To my knowledge this is the first time the name has been removed from someone I've quoted. I did it deliberately this time because my intent was to shine light on the attitude, not the poster.
Other times when I quote, I will delete the part that is superfluous to the point I wish to make. I do this because I find interminably long strings of quotes difficult to follow.
Do you find this practice troublesome?
I see exactly what you are doing and why...........and I don't see a problem with it..................................................raven
06-05-2016 09:51 PM
@Jackaranda wrote:
I have for the most part stopped posting on the MA type of thread. It always becomes my facts are facts and you are racist ,stupid, old,non educated, etc. I prefer to just read them now.
Especially from one poster who ALWAYS believes she's ALWAYS right about every topic. LOL!
06-05-2016 10:05 PM
@Marp wrote:@IamMrsG, before your explanation I just found it a curiosity because I was under the impression that only names were being removed but in light of your admission that you sometimes remove parts of a post that are showing up as a quote I do find that troublesome.
Without the name of the quoted poster it is sometimes difficult to find the post if one wants to see the context in which the quoted post was made.
Removing parts of a post that you find superfluous to your point is disturbing to me. Readers have no way of knowing that part of a quote has been removed and the meaning/intent of the original post can be lost with the remainder being misconstrued.
Doing either in private posts in a closed conversation is likely to have little impact on the conversation because all parties would know who was involved and what was actually said. On an open board doing either and more particularly doing both can lead to long lasting misunderstandings and misconceptions. It is a disaster waiting to happen.
@Marp wrote:@IamMrsG, before your explanation I just found it a curiosity because I was under the impression that only names were being removed but in light of your admission that you sometimes remove parts of a post that are showing up as a quote I do find that troublesome.
Without the name of the quoted poster it is sometimes difficult to find the post if one wants to see the context in which the quoted post was made.
Removing parts of a post that you find superfluous to your point is disturbing to me. Readers have no way of knowing that part of a quote has been removed and the meaning/intent of the original post can be lost with the remainder being misconstrued.
Doing either in private posts in a closed conversation is likely to have little impact on the conversation because all parties would know who was involved and what was actually said. On an open board doing either and more particularly doing both can lead to long lasting misunderstandings and misconceptions. It is a disaster waiting to happen.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
@Yes, it is disturbing to me also @Marp.
Any distortion of a post is imo dishonest and can be self-serving.
06-05-2016 10:07 PM
By removing parts of a post, it takes away the full meaning of what the original poster meant - things can be taken out of context and another meaning can be implied.
06-05-2016 10:16 PM
@MyGirlsMom wrote:By removing parts of a post, it takes away the full meaning of what the original poster meant - things can be taken out of context and another meaning can be implied.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
I see it as just as bad as like not naming a source and claiming the words as your own.
06-05-2016 10:26 PM
@Lila Belle wrote:
@MyGirlsMom wrote:By removing parts of a post, it takes away the full meaning of what the original poster meant - things can be taken out of context and another meaning can be implied.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
I see it as just as bad as like not naming a source and claiming the words as your own.
***
Have you ever read about the College Professor who gave his class a sentence and asked them to change the punctuation? By changing the punctuation, the entire meaning of the sentence was different. I think that by omitting part or parts of a post, the meaning changes or can be (possibly )manipulated to make the poster look badly.
Get sneak previews of special offers & upcoming events delivered to your inbox.
*You're signing up to receive QVC promotional email.
Find recent orders, do a return or exchange, create a Wish List & more.
Privacy StatementGeneral Terms of Use
QVC is not responsible for the availability, content, security, policies, or practices of the above referenced third-party linked sites nor liable for statements, claims, opinions, or representations contained therein. QVC's Privacy Statement does not apply to these third-party web sites.
© 1995-2024 QVC, Inc. All rights reserved. | QVC, Q and the Q logo are registered service marks of ER Marks, Inc. 888-345-5788