So you’re the lawyer. Happy now?
FTFY. … Or is it FTFM in this case? Now I’m confused.
Wow.
No.
I just read the whole transcript of Obama’s eulogy.
Obama did not mention Trump. Didn’t say anything about the President. HE did not blame Trump for anything.
Obama did not say anything about “voter protection of illegal immigrants”. There was no mention at all of illegals nor immigrants even. There was no lobbying for voter protection for them at all.
Obama talked about federal government gassing and beating protesters. This is a thing that is happening today lately in my home town nightly for some time now… hopefully not yet again tonight.
Obama talked about restrictive laws that attack voter rights. This is an ongoing problem in the nation and has been an ongoing battle tied directly to the civil rights era and Jim Crow laws before.
Both of those topics are extremely relevant to a eulogy for John Lewis and his lifelong history of fighting for civil rights.
No. Its not all about Trump his boogeyman foreigners.
2 Likes
True, he didn’t mention Trump by name. But, we all know who he was complaining about. Who is the standing president?
He did talk about voter protection. Who would he be talking of? Illegal immigrants…
Not proper discussion for a funeral. Sounds like buttering up for an election & helping Biden. Just my opinion… you have yours.
1 Like
Why not say what you really mean? I know you wouldn’t want to hurt my feelings…
Because they dont care to say what they mean. They’re more concerned with telling (sorry, explaining, or “educating”) you [about] what you mean. 
1 Like
Yes, I am far too stupid to know what I mean to say. Thank you for putting the “right” words in my mouth for me.
You can quote and alter what I say however you want to “fix” it. But do not continue to attribute that alteration to me, because when stating it’s a quote from me, you’ve done nothing but fabricate a false quote.
But I understand, being “right” is far more important than being accurate.
1 Like
There seems to be some misunderstanding.
With the FTFY, that indicates that the statement was changed, it does not attribute the change to the original source.
It does not indicate it’s what the original poster meant to say, but what the person replying is saying. It can either indicate:
- “I disagree, but that’s close, here… I fixed it so it’s now correct with what I would say with these few words changed.” (Context shows the changes alter the meaning)
Or
- “I agree, but more strongly or with a slightly different nuance” (again evidenced by the edits).
The edits are called out by formatting, that is meant to call attention to them as being changed.
Alternately, one can quote (unchanged) and then repeat it with the edits (and no formatting changes). But this forum software will sometimes automatically remove quotes of whole posts, so that alternate route is aggravating and unworkable… You can’t just quote a post and then follow up with a redundant copy that’s edited.
I apologise for any confusion I have caused.
1 Like
???
I’m lost on your objection here.
Since I changed my own quote’s wording to match your complaint, I figured that loosely fit with an alternate direct reading of “fixed that for YOU”. But, since it was my own quote I was fixing, I was trying to make a joke that it was “Fixed that for Me”.
I fail to see how altering my own quote to more closely match your nitpick is objectionable. Yes I failed at making a joke 
“Glitch99 said:” as part of the quote indicates otherwise. You are doing me a favor and telling everyone what I “really” meant.
As I said, take a statement and alter it however you want. But then they are your words, not mine. And that’s not “fixing it for me”, that’s responding to me.
And… It looks like now you’ve settled on what the phrase FTFY means in context . So I think we’re all in agreement.
Are you noting that that’s clearly and obviously what’s happening (which is the contextual meaning), but at the same time saying that it’s unclear that’s what’s happening? I’m really confused on the apparent conflict.
If we simply want to ban all memes and abbreviations, that’s fine. I was not trying to start any fights or cause confusion.
1 Like
Again I’m going to point out that this is the internet
1 Like
Yeah, in the context of your usage it means “You are doing me a favor and telling everyone what I “really” meant.”
FTFY - Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
http://209.197.79.194/meaning-definition-of/ftfy
(Note, none of these even imply the “fixed” quote should continue being attributed to the original author. You are using what I said as the framework for your own statement.)
Those two statements are not mutually exclusive. So he’s technically correct.
Lewis (and Obama) warned about threats and potential threats to US democracy.
That Trump’s actions threaten US democracy, and fall within the warnings, is also true.
2 Likes
Those werent my words. That was the byline of a report from a major media outlet. I consider that far more legit as a reference, than just giving my subjective interpretation of what I think he was talking about.
Except for the “fact” 
that it’s the reactions to Trump that threaten US democracy…
But the reactions are in fact reacting to Trump’s actions, so technically you are correct that Trump’s actions are indirectly causing this threat…
Although technically, was can just blame George Washington’s mother - she had sex one night centuries ago, and it’s just snowballed from there.
Here’s a technical perspective on this problem. On some other forums, like reddit, the discussion threads are NESTED – the response to a message appears indented and below the original message. Therefore, it is not necessary to attribute any quotes from that message to the original author inline, because the author of the original message is obvious. So reddit does not display the name of the author next to the quote simply because it’s not necessary.
The software used on this forum does not use threaded discussions. The software automatically creates a link and attribution to the author and the post that is being quoted, because otherwise there’d be no way to know who wrote the original quote. In this sense it behaves the same as the bulletin board software used by many other similar forums, including our original home, FatWallet.
With the “FTFY” present, nobody is putting words in the mouth of the author, trying to explain what the author actually wanted to say, or attributing the FIXED quote to the author. In fact, the software on this forum seems to work correctly as well – if you click on the down arrow appearing in the top right corner of the quoted message, it displays the original quote only. It also highlights the quoted part if that part was not modified.
The problem is with your perception of what’s happening, not with what’s actually happening. I would agree with you if “FTFY” did not appear under the quote, but we have not had this happen on this forum as far as I know (I haven’t read everything here, but I have read quite a lot).
I think this happens if you quote the entire post, but your response appears right below it. Discourse assumes that since you’re replying to the preceding post, there’s no point in quoting the whole thing. You can quote parts of it though.
This sounds an awful lot like Ned and Jimbo’s “IT WAS COMING RIGHT FOR ME!”
Where have I heard that? Never mind, it was “a vast right-wing conspiracy”. Who knows this one might be too.
Hey it worked for Al Gore. There is still supposedly a consensus that weather is bad and we have to spend trillions, maybe kill cows and people, and return to the stone age – all to fix the weather … but I digress.
BLM !!! And don’t you forget it.
2 Likes