I quoted it to give an idea of (my interpretation of) the spirit of the norms, not of the letter.
So, in my mind, the number one purpose and requirement of quotes is accuracy. But in your mind, quotation marks can just be used for other things, like giving an idea about a spirit, without worrying much about accuracy? Like, a use of a quotation might not be literally true, but as long as the spirit of what you’re doing seems good and accurate, that’s good enough? I’m trying to understand the norms/values disagreement going on.
I would say because we’re all human, it might be a judgment call to tweak a quote for readability or to fit a character count.
I don’t understand. How does being human give one a reason to tweak a quote? Are you saying people tweak quotes on purpose because they like the tweaked version better and lack respect for quotation accuracy? And that seems OK to you? And you think that attitude is widespread? It is so foreign to me, and so clearly irrational to me, that I struggle to comprehend this.
I personally think that the purpose of text is to share information that’s decision-relevant, and everything else is secondary.
Being humans gives a reason for making all sorts of mistakes / imprecise things, I think it’s OK as long as the information is not misleading, otherwise it’s worth sending a (polite) correction.
Thank you for replying several times and sharing your perspective. I appreciate that.
I think this kind of attitude to quotes, and some related widespread attitudes (where intellectual standards could be raised), is lowering the effectiveness of EA as a whole by over 20%. Would anyone like to have a serious discussion about this potential path to dramatically improving EA’s effectiveness?
So, in my mind, the number one purpose and requirement of quotes is accuracy. But in your mind, quotation marks can just be used for other things, like giving an idea about a spirit, without worrying much about accuracy? Like, a use of a quotation might not be literally true, but as long as the spirit of what you’re doing seems good and accurate, that’s good enough? I’m trying to understand the norms/values disagreement going on.
I don’t understand. How does being human give one a reason to tweak a quote? Are you saying people tweak quotes on purpose because they like the tweaked version better and lack respect for quotation accuracy? And that seems OK to you? And you think that attitude is widespread? It is so foreign to me, and so clearly irrational to me, that I struggle to comprehend this.
I personally think that the purpose of text is to share information that’s decision-relevant, and everything else is secondary.
Being humans gives a reason for making all sorts of mistakes / imprecise things, I think it’s OK as long as the information is not misleading, otherwise it’s worth sending a (polite) correction.
Thank you for replying several times and sharing your perspective. I appreciate that.
I think this kind of attitude to quotes, and some related widespread attitudes (where intellectual standards could be raised), is lowering the effectiveness of EA as a whole by over 20%. Would anyone like to have a serious discussion about this potential path to dramatically improving EA’s effectiveness?