Does Bush's religious faith inappropriately dictatate policy

Re: the problem of posting only links

I would argue that such impermanence is a good indication the source is one that shouldn't be used. I can find news articles going back up to 10 years on some mainstream news sights--including regional papers.

But again, I didn't write the guidelines. I'm just pointing out what is written there and asked of all A2K participants. It's completely up to each person whether he or she wants to abide by or ignore those guidelines.

After scrutinizing the guidelines, I'd like to suggest that the host of each thread might well be the best person to set the limits on quotes for that thread. As one who spent quite a time typing in a long quote, I can say posting biggies tends to be self-limiting for that reason! Another possibility would be to post a precis of the article and ask if anyone would like to know more -- when the article is not available on line or free.

Grumble, grumble. Tres, can you tell us something about your thought processes, i.e. what you were thinking when you adopted this avatar.

Just curious.

:wink:

FWIW - After again consulting the guidelines, I find that they speak more to avoiding monopolizing the discussion than to offering guidelines for how to share a news story or article you've read.

For me credibility of the source is more important than brevity. I'd rather scroll through an entire article and find a link so I can check the source for myself, than read a paragraph with attribution to a source that can easily be linked, but was not.

But again, that's just my opinion.

Suppose one is quoting from a source which is not online -- no link available?

Ohhhhkayyyy, then ... that was not exactly what I had in mind

for the record, blatham's recounting of The Great Debate Guideline Debate is ... uhhhh ... blatham's recounting. I will admit, however, that there is SOME truth o it, but I sbmitthat it is more commentary or opinion than reporting or analysis

Anyhow, and hopefully we can then stop arguing and get back to the war ...

Links and brief quotes are PREFERRED. Naturally, cut-and-paste is sometimes the only way to bring an article to a broad audience ... short-lived links, subscription sites, and that sort of thing. Use it if necessary, don't if it isn't. I cut-and-paste myself ... we all do.
But folks with dialup connections in particular can get slowed down by lengthy clips or large graphics. There's no "Ban" or anything, but consideration of others is requested when considering the use of such. Often, a lengthy article is posted in its entirety when a briefer quote could have been excerpted and posted with appropriate attribution, and a link if one is available. Frequently, the flavor of an article can be gathered frim the first or last few lines of the article ... sometimes the context is important, so a brief quote might not serve. Cut-and-paste when, and how, it makes sense, is all I'm saying. That's just good netiquet.

OK, then?


Good. Now get back out there .... there's a war on, damnit!



timber, who decided to leave the typos.

Timber -- Just a suggestion: You'll notice that the posts above yours left no extra space. Best to check that before posting!

I'm not sure I follow what you're referring to Tartarin ... you've got me confused now. Perhaps it has to do with my loading 100 Posts Per Page ... It helps me keep up with long threads. Is that what you meant?



timber

Timber - I too often wonder why you have so many "wide open spaces" in your posts. Perhaps your "Enter" key sticks? Or are you paid by the column-inch? :wink:

a guaranteed space-efficient post... timber-you got a good laugh from me there...and I assume you now have Tartarin's point with help from tres...to clarify, the guidelines team of big bucks authors (I checked with them) have no problem with pasted articles where they aren't available on line, and no problem if reasonably short in length...settled.

I notice there are some duplicate posts. Assuming no one was reitterating, I deleted the duplicates.

OK ...I guess what was being referred to that I didn't get (duh-OH!) was the spacings between my sentences or paragraphs. I tend to do that a lot I guess. Sometimes, its an indication of a different train of thought,, sometimes I guess maybe its arbitrary, sometimes it indicates a conclusion, or something of that nature. The "timber" at the bottom of my posts is generally 3 or four lines below the message body, and actually is a holdover habit which has become something of a signature. It is a bother to type, really, and I could quit doing it and close up my sentences and paragraphs. I'll try to do that. I'll probably take a while to get it down. I realize it is "Empty Sace".
I'll work on it. Its not like its an article of faith or anything

Timber -- I always assume that a smaller font makes for less space but I don't know that for sure -- do you? That's why I often post teasers and links in size 11 (or 10).

and we all have "faith" in Timber

my god dys...is that your kisser I'm peering at there?

Tartarin, I believe the difference is trivial. It seems to me there's a minimum size for a reply ... whether its just a smiley or a few words in whatever font size. I could be wrong.

Please timber, I like your signoff - go back!

good one PDiddie

i have no god, does that mean i have to think for myself?

Well, maybe dys. But its obvious you didn't do much of it before your last post.