Why is jrista "on Russell McMahon's case"?

Question

@jrista Are you still 'on my case'? I thought you'd quietly given up. What portions do you deem not "properly quoted"?, and what form do you consider "proper quoting" to or should take? I am unaware of your standards for quoting or that there are any explicit ones. Generally, you will find that if you click on any light brown text associated with something that is said to be sourced from elsewhere that you will be automagically transported, as it were, to its source. – Russell McMahon 13 hours ago edit

@jrista - I've added ONE note noting that material that N sites claim as their own isn't. || I note you have used images/image without attribution in recent months which appeared to be copyright or licensed (or were claimed to be on sites I viewed with identical images on them) and I wonder how I can determine which rules apply only to me. – Russell McMahon 13 hours ago edit

@RussellMcMahon: Way to blow things out of proportion man. Chill out, dude. Thanks for noting your sources. – jrista♦ 1 hour ago edit

@jrista - With great power comes great responsibility. With a certain amount of power comes a certain amount :-). A person with moderator rights needs to be aware that "gentle leaning" can be seen (and is) rather different from the user side. I'm an admin in another universe so I have some experience of both sides. I did not change any references and I had marked all sources already. I added the note re the Hyperfocal Distance material being probably public domain. – Russell McMahon 55 mins ago edit

@jrista - On the + side :-),- If there is a guide to proper citing I'd be happy to read it and see if I can do it better. The system I use tends to be quick and makes the information available to people. If I can improve on that to everyone's benefit and it does not take vast extra work I'm happy to try. – Russell McMahon 53 mins ago edit

Answer 1

Russell,

First off, apologies if you think I was purposely getting on your case. That was not my intent. I simply offered a kind request to have content that was not your own original content quoted. I'm a little sad that you took my request in a manner not at all intended. I want you to know that you are not the only person I make such requests of, I either make such requests, or edit posts myself, to ensure they conform to our guidelines for post formatting, content quoting, etc.

Regarding images and other content embedded from off-site resources. Due to the frequency with which you copy external content from other sites, it would be best if you always used the quote (blockquote) tool in our post editor to call out such content. It is also only a matter of courtesy to also link to sources of off-site content, or at least note where it came from (for those who wish to read further and learn more, as well as a tip of the hat to the original creator of said content.) If you are reasonably sure such content is public domain, then a simple comment or footnote indicating as much would keep us moderators from asking in the first place. Even when you find and quote public domain content, it is still best to "quote" it, so it stands out as non-original content, and linking to the original source is still a benefit to readers who wish to follow the link and learn more.

Last, I would greatly appreciate if you would take these kinds of discussions to the proper forum, here in meta. Comments on the public site are not the appropriate place for such discussion. They just add noise that doesn't need to be there.