Exactly, I directed you and other readers to a precise word for word statement of what she said without retyping it.
I do not believe that retyping is necessary or desirable, since the retyper can intentionally or unintentionally make alterations so that the veracity of the quote is in doubt.
You believe that providing a verbatim quote requires retyping.
All good.
2 Likes
There are plenty of murder cases with eye witnesses.
10 Likes
You know… I used to think we’d never top the SpiritHorse and NP threads (although the deer in the pool was pretty good). I clearly underestimated COTH…
17 Likes
The quote function works extremely well. Very little typing required. Easy peasy.
21 Likes
Indeed. In an earlier post @YankeeDuchess thanked someone for teaching her how to use the quote function, so it seems to me she is simply trying to be deliberately obtuse and annoying with her post numbers and vague “verbatim” quotes. Time to go back to skipping her posts and ignoring her and save a lot of time.
Keep in mind, all these little games of “follow the shiny light” is a tired tactic currently used to divert attention from something else.
15 Likes
It was a nice relief this afternoon, wasn’t it?
5 Likes
Why use the quote function when you can twist the words yourself or take them out of context to cause righteous indignation?
Those of us who have been here for a while are just assumed to be simple and stupid.
15 Likes
Yep, it is still working. Easy-peasy. Look - I just quoted cutter99 verbatim! And I am about to do it again…
Yep . That has been made abundantly clear. We have also been assigned motives and opinions that we do not have and never had…
17 Likes
Makes you question the motivation of the person who cannot seem to master quoting, doesn’t it???
13 Likes
Of all my transgression, I have now been accused of “trying to be deliberately obtuse and annoying with her post numbers and vague ‘verbatim’ quotes.” Any obtuseness was not deliberate.
I provided the post numbers in response to a direct question asking, Has anyone actually claimed such and such? Well, yeah, someone has, here are the post numbers.
How is responding to a direct question “diverting attention”?
It was AF who wanted to go three rounds on the definition of “verbatim”, not me. I thought it was absurd. I agree that it is vastly better to use either the quote feature or a reference to the post number instead of retyping, so that the reader knows that it is in fact the original words.
I now understand that some people prefer the quote feature over references to post numbers.
All good?
2 Likes
I read them.
4 Likes
Really sucks to be you if the obtuseness is not deliberate.
You did not want to go three rounds on the definition of verbatim because you were wrong.
Again, sucks to be you!
12 Likes
YOU said you quoted verbatim. Quoting verbatim =/= directing to her posts.
You could do that by quoting, copy /paste, or yes, typing.
Ultimately, I was simply looking for you to offer what you said you did.
My mistake. Yes, back to ignoring, indeed.
”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹
8 Likes
:lol::lol:
I get it now, you’re being funny!
5 Likes
While claiming they quoted. Verbatim, no less.
7 Likes
By your own definition, verbatim is supposed to be precise. Just sayin
10 Likes
Because I am generally a nice person unless aggravated, let me teach you something else…referring us to the post number wastes our time going back searching when you’ve already found the post and, more importantly, the OP (original poster) can easily go back at any time and edit their post so it may not be what it was when originally posted. That’s why you will frequently see a post almost immediately quoted with “QFP” = quoted for posterity. When you quote a post, you are sharing verbatim what that post looked like at the time it was quoted and shared.
22 Likes
Not going a fourth or fifth round on this. You win.
1 Like
