Quoting Posts

[SteveT]

Should be retitled Huguenot's fiskal policies.

[The Chair]

LuLu Too Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm with *Bob* on this one.

> And Fisking makes my eyes go funny...

>

> What's happening in The Drawing Room?

> Surely this thread should be lounged by now?!

Agreed. Too much silly behaviour.

[woofmarkthedog]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I do read some stuff in here, but to be honest I

> usually skip over a lot of the 'point-by-point

> rebuttals'.

>

> The content might well be pertinent and useful but

> they just look really, really boring.

_____________________________________________________

Agree....

My eyes boggle & I "ZZzzzzz" out

W**F

[KidKruger]

KalamityKel:

"Altho I was sure 'fisking' was something else... something between two males... ah nevermind !"

- no reason why females can't enjoy such a pastime KK.

[Ladymuck]

KidKruger Wrote:

> - no reason why females can't enjoy such a pastime

> KK.

I've been enjoying fisking in the Drawing Room since that room's inception.

[legalbeagle]

As have I old thing. Rather a disappointment to discover that it's so controversial in this day and age.

[brum]

Only controversial to some. Refreshingly different to others.

[Ladymuck]

You into fisking too brum?

[Ladymuck]

The Chair Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LuLu Too Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I'm with *Bob* on this one.

> > And Fisking makes my eyes go funny...

> >

> > What's happening in The Drawing Room?

> > Surely this thread should be lounged by now?!

>

>

> Agreed. Too much silly behaviour.

I've just seen this! A blatant "fisk" if ever I saw one! From our esteemed Chair too!

*shakes head and tutts twice*

[Mick Mac]

Thought the OP was a bit OTT - just let people do it how they want to do it surely.

Having said that, along similar lines, I don't like it when people quote a lengthy post and than just say that they agree with it. No value added and also it takes a hell of a long time on my little phone to scroll down through a long post, and as I'm sometimes trying to wind down on the way home from work, it irritates me a bit.....just a bit though.

[brum]

I have been known to fisk in my time, LM!

Ladymuck Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You into fisking too brum?

[giggirl]

I've never fisked but I'm tempted to have a go. It sounds really dirrty. I don't think I can resist. Then, next time I'm late for something (and I always am), I can casually drop in "sorry honey, I was having so much fun fisking I lost track of time".

[mockney piers]

Totally agreed MM, that is one of the most annoying habits that plenty of posters are guilty of.

Keef's patented "what bob said" does the trick much more succinctly.

I have done the odd fisk when someone's tortured logic needs teasing apart thus making a converstational response impossible.

BUt on the whole I think it detracts from a conversational tone, you wouldn't fisk someone down the pub would you, you'd say "I don't know I think you're barking up the wrong tree with your dog clamping idea, but when it comes to taxing three wheeled prams I reckon you're on to a winner there."

On here it just makes for a more pleasant read and is a bit more aesthetically pleasing; better than all those damn ugly greater-thans ">" everywhere.

If you are going to quote, and its a perfectly valid thing to do, then I'd love it if people just picked the relevant bit more often and use either "sumfink" or

sumfink else

.

my two-penneths worth anyhow

[Huguenot]

Clearly I'm in agreement with Mockers.

To refer to earlier insinuations, I'm not sure that I misinterpret at all. I think I get it absolutely spot on most of the time. The fact that I can't 'prove' it doesn't make it any less accurate. If I consider on reflection I've got it wrong I'm happy to apologise.

Moos, I note that even your entire criticism was missing a direct reference. Do I assume then that I am 'misinterpreting' and you are actually talking about someone else? Or am I in fact spot on. Again. That that was snidey insinutation and directed at me?

As for aggressiveness.... well I guess that's subjective. I can only tell you that I don't feel aggressive at all. I usually shorten my posts to make them more objective. I can see that makes me appear terse, but mainly I think you're all big enough to stand up for yourselves..

[Jeremy]

While some of you find it annoying, it's clear that not everyone feels the same way. However "spot on" you think you are!!

Mockney... the '>' character is actually a feature of the forum, it happens automatically when you hit "quote this message". So perhaps you should be speaking to the admin about this? I agree that the "box" formatting is neater.

[Huguenot]

Sorry Jezza, I was responding to an ad hominem attack from earlier in the thread. It wasn't ontopic, but hell, we're in the lounge now ;-)

Disparate views on 'quoting' are of course subjective. I made the assertion to prompt a discussion, not to assume that I had the answer.

[HAL9000]

Misinterpretation is a common complaint - the record speaks for itself in that respect.

I?ve noticed the same problem regarding terse or brief (I would say precise or succinct) being interpreted as aggressive or, worse, arrogant.

Sometimes a subtle sense of humour or irony is either not perceived or misinterpreted.

We are what we are and we do what we do ? I guess.

[Ladymuck]

Cheer up grump...err...Huguenot, this has turned out to be (I think) a rather entertaining thread.

Personally, I find breaking up long paragraphs and responding that way useful. To my mind, the practice also imparts order and neatness (though clearly, you - and others - do not agree). I shall attempt to try and cut down (a bit) seeing as it annoys some...but don't expect complete cessation!

As for your comment: "I'm not sure that I misinterpret at all. I think I get it absolutely spot on most of the time. The fact that I can't 'prove' it doesn't make it any less accurate., my automatic response was to burst out laughing (I found it funny because it is so typical of you), but I am now wondering whether...oh to hell with it...

*lobs another tomato at Huguenot*

[Huguenot]

;-)

[Moos]

Huguenot has asked me to clarify both in his post and in a PM that I was talking about him.

I sometimes find the debates too aggressive for my liking, and in my perception people sometimes pick up on others' responses and partially or wholly misinterpret them to score points rather than trying to move the general discussion towards a shared understanding. I didn't intend to be sly or snide - it would have been inappropriate to name Huguenot as he's not the only person who does it but to be clear he was someone I had in mind.

[mockney piers]

I realise that jeremy, and it's a web culture standard too, I just wih people would hit "quote this messge" a little

less often especially when, as Mick Mac points out, they quote an 20 paragraph post and add "me too" at the end. Bah humbug etc.

[Ladymuck]

But MP, I haven't a clue to what you are referring in your last post precisely because you haven't pressed the "quote this message" button. Indeed, I now need to go back...far more irritating (to my mind).

*lobs a tomato at MP too!*

[mockney piers]

We shall have to agree to differ then ms muck.

I think of threads as conversations and dislike things being repeated ad nauseum. But that might be a reaction to Dpaniards who feel they have to say everything two or three times, preferably shouted over everybody else speaking at the same time.

Hmmmm, perfect description of the forum thinking about it!!

[Ladymuck]

?QUI?N ES GRITAR?

Pero s? me tomo su punto.

[HAL9000]

mockney piers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Dpaniards

I tried looking that up but Google suggested "Spaniards" - you almost had me there!

Re quoting: if one can respond immediately after another post - fair enough, but when the issue has migrated several posts to the north, or where several other posters have intervened, a brief 'so-and-so wrote what' is essential to provide context without forcing readers to scroll up - especially on this forum where threads are not sub-threaded. IMHO.