Discussion Forums

Where's the line in the sand as far as self-reference goes? My submission (that one about Michael Buble) came out of a conversation I was having IRL. Is it alright to put like, I dunno, first names in the submission, or should we just steer clear altogether?

I'd personally prefer it if people only name their sources when it's vital to understanding the context of the quote.

Look at all the lists of supposed Bushisms on the net - are they really any funnier for being attributed to Bush? I don't think they are (and in fact I think it makes the writer look somewhat silly, but that's a different discussion).

If you're quoting part of a conversation then I suppose it makes it clearer to name the participants - but if fake names would work just as well, why not use them?

I'm not going to start rejecting/deleting/editing stuff for using names, though. (Except of course to avoid personal embarrassment. One of the quotes on this site was actually my own, spoken in a fumble-tongued moment of drunkenness, which as anyone who knows me can tell you, is not an unusual occurrence. No, I'm not telling you which one.)

I suppose the real line in the sand gets drawn the first time we get sued and told to take something down!

I don't think that first names alone are a problem unless they're especially distinctive - if in any doubt, Mike's idea of using fake names seems the best option. Surnames are best avoided altogether though, IMO, but my attitude towards rejecting/deleting/editing is the same as Mike's.