I think proper quoting should have a link to original source, whenever able.
Also, proper quoting etiquette implies that you quote enough to maintain the original intended meaning of the person being quoted (a.k.a keep the damn context)
We've seen in our community overusing the cheap-trick of chopped-quoting. Where you cling yourself in a reductionist quoting that shifts the meaning of the original context, into appearing to have a different meaning of intention. This is not a brilliant invention of their own, but a long-time known technique common in unprofessional journalisms, and when caught, and caught repetively and exhaustively, it should undermine the trust of the sourcing.
Let me give you an example:
I can quote bugman like this:
Bugman wrote:Israel very carefully designed FGMEMBERS
IH-COL says : Yeah! Thanks for recognizing it.
In reality, If I am fair at it, instead of attempting distorting reality, and distorting Bugman intentions, the quote should actually maintain context, and when appropriate, contain a linked reference to a more complete source (As to allow readers to verify the quote)
In a fair case, what Bugman actually meant is this:https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic. ... 85#p285662
Bugman wrote:The objections are to the tactics used and the deliberate aims of minimising or completely cutting off contributions upstream to the core FlightGear infrastructure for the sole purpose of rendering it irrelevant, so that Israel can have his infrastructure as the de-facto FlightGear infrastructure. This is not something that would be of any concern for a user. But it has long term implications for the code and content developments in the FlightGear project, as it drains resources and creates deliberately constructed conflict. All of this simply comes down to how Israel very carefully designed FGMEMBERS to advance his goal of replacing the core infrastructure.
And in this case scenery, a fair quote, will reveal the real intent of Bugman, which oppose to what I'd like, he suggests, that the sole purpose of FGMEMBERS is undermine FG structure, and future. With a fair quote, we can, definitely understand that Bugman is, as usual, just spreading misinformation, and FUD to politicize users against using FGMEMBERS.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall