Comment/opinion Separate From Quoted Article

[Steve2UK]

Please be aware that if you going to post a news article to not include one's own personal opinion in the post. Post a separate post regarding your opinion.

I am deleting all posts that continue to do this, after the fact of soundman's prior warning. Please do not PM me complaining because your post has been deleted, since it had already been made clear what is acceptable in the news forum.

Is it now the case (as per my understanding of the above) that from now on we must always make any comment in a second post separate from any article quoted?

I appreciate that some members have edited/highlighted parts of articles to make their points or to emphasise key details, but is the above approach not hugely unwieldy? I can foresee quoted articles getting separated from the relevant comment when other members post in between. That's surely going to make it a major chore to cross-refer back and forth to the article (which may end up on a different page) from the comment?

For myself, I follow a policy of clearly separating the article from my comments by both spacing in the post and using italics for the quoted article (ordinary typeface for the comments).

Surely there's a better way to achieve what I assume is wanted (avoiding confusion between quoted article and poster's comment) than this?

[Steve2UK]

Please be aware that if you going to post a news article to not include one's own personal opinion in the post. Post a separate post regarding your opinion.

I am deleting all posts that continue to do this, after the fact of soundman's prior warning. Please do not PM me complaining because your post has been deleted, since it had already been made clear what is acceptable in the news forum.

Is it now the case (as per my understanding of the above) that from now on we must always make any comment in a second post separate from any article quoted?

I appreciate that some members have edited/highlighted parts of articles to make their points or to emphasise key details, but is the above approach not hugely unwieldy? I can foresee quoted articles getting separated from the relevant comment when other members post in between. That's surely going to make it a major chore to cross-refer back and forth to the article (which may end up on a different page) from the comment?

For myself, I follow a policy of clearly separating the article from my comments by both spacing in the post and using italics for the quoted article (ordinary typeface for the comments).

Surely there's a better way to achieve what I assume is wanted (avoiding confusion between quoted article and poster's comment) than this?

It's now a week since I raised the question about the requirement to keep comment/editorialising separate from quoted articles - by putting them in separate posts.

With all due respect, what is the point of having a Forum Support Desk sub-forum if questions relevant to many more members than just me go un-answered seven days after they're posted?

A glance at the News Clippings sub-forum will show breeches of this "separate post" rule. Some get edited/deleted - and some are left as they are. I suggest that this kind of inconsistency can only encourage the view that some Forum rules can be take with a pinch of salt and that some members will simply decide for themselves which rules to follow and which to ignore. Overall - it surely can't make for a well-behaved and sensibly-run forum.

On a related point, some are following the (apparently still current) restriction on quoting no more than the first three lines (or two paragraphs as George stated in his answer to my other Support question) from Bangkok Post articles - and some aren't. Again, some are edited/deleted and some aren't. This confusion and inconsistency is helping no-one.

Will Admin please make the current policies on both issues clear to all of us? Either confirm that one or both are still in place - or that one or both are now lifted? Whichever is the case, I suggest the policy should then be applied consistently.

[sbk]

The report button is there for a reason. Since you seem well-versed in using it why not use it for these cases as well? Moderators only catch what we see and I think you are being extremely unrealistic to expect mods to catch everything all the time.

Yes, it is preferred that commentary be kept separate from a quoted news report. many members do not wrap the article in a quote and that can make it difficult to determine what is the article and what is opinion.

As for the Bangkok Post, we are currently undergoing negotiations with them regarding this, as we had been led to believe that it was allowed.

[PhilHarries]

Well I wasn't aware of this ruling so I may have been one of the transgreesors.

Will have to remember:-

1. Post article.

2. Add reply i.e. any comments I may have.

Does sound a bit unweildy as sometimes I add bits before and after the article so is someone posts a reply before I finish my bits it could be confusing.

Oh well, will try it and see.

[Steve2UK]

The report button is there for a reason. Since you seem well-versed in using it why not use it for these cases as well? Moderators only catch what we see and I think you are being extremely unrealistic to expect mods to catch everything all the time.

Yes, it is preferred that commentary be kept separate from a quoted news report. many members do not wrap the article in a quote and that can make it difficult to determine what is the article and what is opinion.

As for the Bangkok Post, we are currently undergoing negotiations with them regarding this, as we had been led to believe that it was allowed.

sbk, it's good to get a response - and, please, I was not trying to imply that Mods are falling down on the job. Of course, they can only deal with what they see or get reported to them. My apologies if I inadvertently invited any such inference - none of us is perfect.

Your second paragraph goes straight to the point that I have been trying to make all along - that there are easy and effective ways (through formatting, quote marks etc) to ensure that the article is left intact and that comment/opinion/editorialising about it are clearly the poster's own....... without having to resort to placing them in separate posts. Is it really not possible/workable to make something like that the requirement rather than separate posts for each element?

Thank you also for the update about the Bangkok Post situation. I'll wait to read the outcome of those discussions.

[sbk]

Certainly but many posters seem incapable of it so it just makes it easier to tell them to do it separately.

[Steve2UK]

Certainly but many posters seem incapable of it so it just makes it easier to tell them to do it separately.

OK, my last word on the subject - and then I'll shut up (promise! ).

I'd like to suggest a trial period (up to you how long - but say 2-4 weeks?) where opinion/editorialising/comment is allowed in the same post as the quoted article - BUT a] the quoted article must be enclosed in "quote marks" and must not be altered from the original in any way and b] there must be a minimum of 5 lines spacing after the article (and link to it) and before the poster starts his/her comment.

You could add that the article should also be shown in italics (as is my custom) - but this may be unnecessary and beyond some to achieve. I think no-one can have any excuse for not being able to use the Return/Enter key to create the obvious 5-line gap between article and comment.

If the above approach doesn't work well/often enough - then, of course, it should revert to the current 2-post system.

What do you think? Happy and workable medium?

[Jai Dee]

Thanks for your suggestions Steve.

We'll discuss them and see if we agree that they are workable.

[Tywais]

Confusing........ is it finally resolved or now back under discussion again ?

It's currently still under negotiations.