By definition, that's what commentary is...an expression of opinion.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A suggestion for improving this sub-forum
- Thread starter Yerda
- Start date
By definition, that's what commentary is...an expression of opinion.
Cooky
Veteran Member
And that can be found in quoted paragraphs from a link. Nowhere do the rules say it has to come personally from the poster.
You're right. It doesn't. And ignorance to the definition of "commentary" will not protect you from moderation should you not adhere to said rule. It's been explained and elaborated upon, so now you understand.
The choice is now yours to follow it or don't.
Cooky
Veteran Member
You're right. It doesn't. And ignorance to the definition of "commentary" will not protect you from moderation should you not adhere to said rule. It's been explained and elaborated upon, so now you understand.
The choice is now yours to follow it or don't.
Fair enough, you're the arbitrators. I don't know why, it has to be interpreted that way, but I'm sure there's some reason, somewhere, by someone who knows... Maybe.
Cooky
Veteran Member
Probably the rule was created to prevent bots from operating here?
...I know some forums allow bots that generate news story's with a link and two paragraphs. I notice there are no bots here.
Internet bot - Wikipedia
...I know some forums allow bots that generate news story's with a link and two paragraphs. I notice there are no bots here.
Internet bot - Wikipedia
Last edited by a moderator:
Terry Sampson
Well-Known Member
Cooky
Veteran Member
Amen, amen, I say to you!
Last edited by a moderator:
I'll explain: we came up with that part if the rule several years before you joined because we knew you'd make it here eventually and that it would really get on your nerves once you showed up.
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
I agree. Another forum I used to belong to referred to it as "argument via footnote".
Cooky
Veteran Member
Well, that's the problem with this forum -people offering opinions without any verifiable, credible evidence or facts.
...The popular trend is to scoff at the idea of providing links and quotes.
Essentially the atmosphere this rule leads to is opinion vs. opinion.
Stanyon
WWMRD?
Hopefully the mods don't have to get involved, just ignore those threads and eventually they would get the point...one would think. I see it like this, if you create a thread and put zero effort into personalizing it then why should I waste my time? It comes off as just being lazy, trolling or just fishing.
You do understand that this thread is about the EvC sub-forum, not the forum in general, yes? So please file all other
Also, you might want to check...I think you may have left the irony on.
Cooky
Veteran Member
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
You do realize there is middle ground between "offering opinions without verification" and posting copied material only, right? It is possible to offer one's opinions, support them with verifiable facts and citations, but not rely exclusively on copied material.
The rule used to say, "In your own words". Maybe we need to put that back in.
Cooky
Veteran Member
You know, we wouldn't be having problems like this if you guys would just let me go ahead with my Dr. Seuss Rules revisions idea that you all keep voting down.
"And now we come to our nifty rule 4,
Take a moment to read it, then read it some more,
If you post a picture, quotation or link,
Supply your own words, tell us all what YOU think".
See? I bet people would actually read that.
Yeah I know, the illustrations are amateurish but I'm getting better.
exchemist
Veteran Member
That is also true on a number of other forums I belong to. The reason is that lazy posters sometimes post a link without making it clear what, about the linked material, they want to discuss and why. That is both lazy and rude, because it makes readers do all the work and forces them to guess what the point of interest is.
The worst practice is linking videos. A video typically takes about ten minutes to convey information that can be read in two minutes or less in printed form.
People should have an obligation to make clear what they want to discuss and why, and then by all means support it with linked material. It's not exactly onerous, since presumably they must have a rationale for creating the thread in the first place.
Cooky
Veteran Member
That kind of makes sense.
...So it doesn't actually have to do with preventing bots then?
exchemist
Veteran Member
Interesting point. I had not thought of that. I suppose it may have something to do with that too.