Because I didn’t think my contributions were especially worthwhile or that anyone really cared about them. I recently read this post:
I realized that learning in the background without contributing isn’t helpful to Elliot. And since I care about him and want him to keep making content I am going to try to engage more.
That makes sense except why did you use the Unbounded category?
Because I wanted criticism of my ideas, people to point out flaws, etc. Isn’t that the purpose of the unbounded category?
Hi, speaking as a moderator, you need to edit your post to blockquote the quote and be more careful with quotes going forward.
You’ve posted my writing as if it’s your writing (there’s no markup indicating otherwise, it’s just body text within your post). You should also put the source before the quote (just like e.g. earlier in your post you have “lmf:” before, not after, the text lmf wrote. it makes more sense to introduce quotes beforehand so people know what they’re reading while reading it, instead of after).
For how to quote, type “>”, use the quote button, or see the quoting section at Forum Features Guide
Quoting issues are one of the few things that are actively policed at this forum (and I don’t like having to waste time on them, but inaccurate or misleading quotes are worse). Please use the post preview feature since it should be pretty easy to see visually that it didn’t come out right.
Isn’t this the default behaviour when I highlight some text and select the “Quote” option? I can see in the post preview that the quote I selected is showing as “Elliot: just like e.g. earlier…”
Highlight the text you want to quote by clicking and dragging with the mouse, and then click on the Quote button.
Source: Forum Features Guide
Following that process results in the “lmf:” before, not after, the text lmf wrote.
Sorry, I thought that the way I quoted it and provided the source would make it clear it was not my writing. I will be more careful in the future.
You’ve now edited the text within the quote to be inaccurate – it does not match the text on the source webpage.
You’re maybe confused by misreading and mixing up before and after? Sources should go before quotes (and outside of the blockquote), not after nor inside. Any text in a blockquote should be exactly literally correct, character for character – it must be the actual quote as the other person wrote it (with exceptions for standard quoting techniques like square brackets and ellipses).
EDIT: Sources that appear within a blockquote are OK when they are done by Discourse software like this:
The raw text for that should look something like:
[quote=“Elliot, post:26, topic:522”]
Note that the source there is actually an attribute of the quote tag, not within the blockquote.
Yes, I got confused reading the below sentence:
In this context I thought you meant the “source” was lmf. And that I should put the source (like lmf, or Elliot Temple) after the text. So I modified my previous quote (from the mental illness discussion) to put your name after the text that you wrote.
It should be fixed now. Thanks for your feedback.
Stuff like this is pretty typical in my experience. It’s an example of why I think people should study and practice grammar trees. I think that would help people. I’ve been making educational stuff about it because I think it’s an important problem for most people to work on.
Sorry, I wrote this post earlier (shortly after my latest one) but my internet disconnected and it didn’t post:
Okay sorry, last post on this hopefully. I think I misunderstood what you wrote here. First, you said I should put the source (like the discussion linked on curi.us) before the quote, and not after.
Then when you said “just like e.g. earlier…” I thought you were referencing another mistake I made. Rereading it, I think you were saying I did it correctly earlier and you were telling me to continue doing it like that (with the source “lmf:” before the quote, not after).
I think I was feeling defensive, possibly foolish for not attributing the quote properly. I was in the mindset of “I did something wrong, I need to fix my mistake.” But instead of reading carefully, I jumped to the conclusion that the way I quoted “lmf:” was wrong and it needed to be fixed. Even though I felt your response was contradictory I didn’t take the time to make sure I read it properly, I was focused on fixing my mistake quickly.
Next time I’m feeling defensive I’ll try to remember to read carefully, rather than rushing to fix my mistake.
This is not a refutation of my criticism. My criticism was that you mischaracterized what you wrote:
(By the way, I also think that ideas are stored in the brain. That’s not the issue. )
