Wow dude, that is quite some Sherlock Holmes stuff you got going on. You really need to take a break from the internet bro, you are starting to sound a bit unhinged yourself. Let's dive in here shall we?
Yes, I know. I wonder why you didn't simply state that in your original post.
I didn't know I had to state that the link was to the
original story. Let me take you through the process that has us here now. I sometimes go to
Newser.com , I look through the stories to see if there is anything interesting. I sometimes will post stories from
Newser here in the Soapbox. This particular story caught my eye. I clicked on the the story, it brings up a window, it has a summary of the story that I read, the story intrigued me and I wanted to read more. At that time I clicked on the link in the summary to go to the original piece in the Washington Post. I read the story, thought I would post here in the Soapbox. It was lengthy so I figured I would put the summary from Newser here and supply the link so that if you wanted to know more about the story, and possibly comment on the story, you could click the link to further reading the story.
It is the generally accepted convention here (and on most forums) that when you post a quoted article that you provide a link to that which you quoted so people can go to the original source and read it, if they so choose.
You know what turtle, why don't you post a list of
"forum etiquette" so we can all be as well versed on the
proper way to do things here to keep you happy.
It's quite odd that you'd post the Newser synopsis as the quoted text, and fail to provide the link to the Newser article itself. Odd, indeed, as if it was done on purpose for some reason.
Odd I tell you, odd. WTF are you talking about? I'll try and go slow so you can follow along. Go to
Newser, find the story that we are referring to, click the "more" link, that will then show you a summary of the summary, and a LINK to the original piece. If you then click on the title of the article it will take you to another page with more of the summary, and a area to give
"your take" and a comments section. there isn't a Newser story, they don't have there own stories, they only give you a summary of the original story and a LINK to go that story if you so choose.
You've got a link there just above quoted text, which certainly to most people will appear to be quoted text from the link immediately above it. But of course, you know that, as you have admitted.
Wow....I think I give more credit to those here in the Soapbox than you do. You really think anyone could come up with a rational idea, opinion or a view on the summary that I provided? Really? You don't think any rational person would read that summary and then if they were interested in commenting about it wouldn't go to the link I provided before commenting on the story?
Knowing that most people will not click a link to re-read what they've already seen as quoted text, your post here seems deceptive.
No turtle, actually I thought anyone that would possibly think about commenting on the story would've clicked on my link and read the whole story before doing so. How could anyone possibly comment on the summary that I provided, without reading the original piece?
I can't see how it's ignorantly or incompetently deceptive, since you clearly know how to quote text and provide links, so we're left with blatantly and willful deception on your part.
Really turtle? give me one reason why I would want to be deceitful. A story about the underwear bomber and protocols on security. Why on God's green earth would I want or need to be deceitful?
It was very well done, too, I might add. I only came back to the thread as an afterthought and clicked the link.
Well I hope you would have, that's why I put the link there. Because if you came away with an opinion or view on a
summary then you and anyone else who may have done so are doing yourself and everyone else around you a dis-service.
Imagine my surprise when I couldn't find the quoted text anywhere in the article. Then I had to take the time to locate the original source of the synopsis.
Great job, now what did you think of the story? In
Newser they take a news story, a writer gives a brief summary of that stroy and then they give you a link to the original story. It's a BIG CONSPIRACY.....woooooooo.
What link provided by Newser? You never referenced Newser at all. Unless one is as smart as me, they would never be able to find the link provided by Newser.
You get a gold star turtle. Instead of giving the link to
Newser and then having anyone iterested in reading the original piece, I decided to just give the link to the original piece. All I did was cut out the middle man.
Thanks.
Then you should have posted all of this along with the story, so as to fully explain what the heck you were doing, instead of crafting a deception. Then it would have been simple. Links are to simplify, not complicate, and if you have to take this much test to explain something that was supposed to be simple, then it wasn't simple, and was instead an attempt to deceive. It's that simple.
No turtle, you are making something easy, difficult, a mountain out of mole hill, looking for something that isn't there. You got a hard on for me and that's fine, but stop spending your time and effort in making me into something I am not and accusing me of something that I am not.
ANd you have a firm grasp of the obvious.
Thank you, I am starting to wonder about your grasp on the obvious though.
That is correct, except you gave no indication that there was more to the article for them to go read.
I thought by posting a LINK from the get go, people would realize that there was more to the article for them to read. I will clearly point that out in the future, just for you turtle.
And I believe that you, knowing most, not all, but most in here probably won't take the time to make a simple click to re-read what they've already read, is the reason you did what you did,
Actually no, I thought if anyone would read the article and wanted to more about the story they would've clicked the LINK to further read the story.
I gotta run.........I have more later.
