A quote is a quote is a quote...

- and not necessarily anything else.

Why do people often seem to assume that the following statement is always true - "automatically by definition"... ? :

"Any post that makes a reference [by quoting] to something someone said in another post is a rebuttal of whatever was said in the quote."



The occurrence of a quote in a post is saying:

"With reference to [what is in the quote]..."
"With regard to [what is in the quote]..."
"In reflection of [what is in the quote]..."
"Based on [what is in the quote]..."

It is not saying:

"[what is in the quote] is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!! "


Within the post itself, these may apply:

At least 9-to-1, and we choose the 1 - and attach it to the "mere existence" of the quote... Why?

Please let the comments of the post determine - in your mind - the "mood" of the poster.

Please do not assume that - the mere fact that you were quoted - means the person has something to say against you... Very often, if not most often, this is not the case.

We Christians, of all people, should look for the best possible scenario - not the worst -- especially from each other...

Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath: For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. ~ James 1:19-20

"swift to hear" -- "Give sufficient time and effort to obtaining the proper impression and interpretation."
"slow to speak" -- "Don't be in such a big hurry to get a reply written and posted."
"slow to wrath" -- "Don't write a reply in anger."

Wait. Read the post again. Try to imagine the best possible scenario. Don't assume anything before it has been well-thought-out...



.

Also...

Please do not assume that - the mere fact that you were quoted - means the person is addressing you (specifically) in that post -- yes, it does happen often - and, in may cases it is painfully obvious - but, in general, it should not be considered the 'default' case... (Someone can just as easily [simply] make reference to what someone else said while actually addressing everyone.)

Notice in the quote above - there is no mention of 'who' - only 'what'...

'Originally Posted by <name>' only indicates who said [what is in the quote] -- it should never be interpreted as "who this post is directed at/to"...

I personally consider the 'default' case to be "everyone" - and interpret accordingly - unless I can see a clear indication that it is indeed directed at one or more people in particular.

Indeed, the general 'rule of thumb' is (or should be, IMHO) - the post is addressing everyone unless there is evidence in the context of the post discussion that clearly indicates that it is someone else.

Sometimes the context itself (alone) is sufficient. Sometimes it is not.

"Needless to say, we should all be very diligent in trying to word our posts in a way that will make very clear who we are talking to..."

This is a very common method that works exceedingly well at communicating our intended 'target':

<name>: blah blah blah blah

What are some other good methods that are especially intuitive?

Do you consider the 'default' case (from above) to be "everyone"...?

What clues/cues used in a post do you consider "universally accepted" as being interpreted a certain way? And what is the interpretation of it?

What clues/cues used in a post do you consider should be "universally accepted" as being interpreted a certain way? And what should be the interpretation of it?

Are you in agreement with the title of this thread, as set forth in the initial post?

How do you see any of this differently?

Thoughts?

What I am hoping we can accomplish with this thread:

~ Bring awareness to the fact (if true, and to what extent) that people are being offended simply because of the dissimilar writing styles and posting habits of those who post in the forums.
~ Provoke thoughtfulness that will engender a more caring attitude towards making a concerted effort to truly making a distinctively positive change on this site. ("Catch all of that...?")
~ Build a consensus from which we can operate to communicate more effectively - and thus, offend less.
~ Encourage everyone to more actively evaluate and cultivate good posting habits.



.

Re: OOPS


I guess "someone else" would be nobody, huh?

(What I meant to say was "one or more people in particular" or "less than everyone"; i.e., "not everyone"...)

Anyone?

.

GRA, I would like to commend you for this post. Very well said. I thank everyone for sharing their thoughts in the forum. My knowledge of the bible is less and so I admire those people sharing the WORD for every post. I'd like to stress out that we pray at all times. I believe that prayer is the backbone of each ministry. To keep in mind that our goal is to glorify God and encourage everyone.....To God be the glory

Thank you.

.

Thoughts?

Comments?

.

when one quotes what somebody has posted, that would truly depend on how the other feels, interprets what was posted in reference to what was quoted. One must have the ability to control their feelings towards the response. Like what's going on with quoting on one of the forums right now. I just quoted one. Hooray! It takes a lot of maturity in addressing a quote. For me, I would take that as an opportunity. It might be hurt. It might encourage. The goal is I learn.

This is my thought....

Hello Gra
I agree with you in all that you've said in this post. I like this post and am glad that you are addressing it.
As brothers and sisters in Christ, I just ask that all of us apply the love of God which covers patience, kindness, not rude, not proud, not easily angered etc, so that we can learn from each other to grow in God's word and be edified.

Well you have to understand GRA............................
(people are nuts).

This is why we need the solemn, sound Word of God. - - - (a strange thing these days)

Now,...having said that I'd like to give some references:

1) J. Payul Getty - "People are friggin' nuts!" - from the work - " My Love, My Life"
2) Vernon Pap - "Some give references that are not real" - from - "Wow!, Am I Crazy"
3) Joe Smithereens - "I find in my technical analysis that medical doctors are full of "#@*t" - from - "My Time With Florence Nightengale"
4) Frank Ovary - "It happens.....Once a Month ...... Or So I Think" - from his seminal work - "By Chance.....A Sperm by Any Other Name"

"I see you have included yourself in that description..."

Why does everyone like to "shoot down" and/or "belittle" every 'good and honest' well-intentioned effort that somebody makes on here [hopefully] for the benefit of everyone...???

Excellent posts, these should be stickies. And oft quoted!

These forums are public and so I assume for most purposes posts are intended for public consumption, both in writing and reading them. Exceptions are comments specifically addressed to the quotee, or obvious conversations that develope between small groups of 2 or 3. And verse wars. And ego wars. But keep in mind these are still publically consumned.

I sometimes start in reference to a quote, then move on to address other unquoted thread issues or participants. I hope that's not too confusing.

**** BUMP ****

( Just a little reminder... )

OOPS!

in many cases

And --- To God Be The Glory

I oft times quote myself, in that way I can assure that AT LEAST ONE person agrees with me.......folks should consider this when it seems that everyone is against them............OR...........they could turn to Scripture........the BEST SOURCE for quotations that I have found..........

What the...