You copied two paragraphs, word for word, from the NY Times without attribution. As one who is a prodigious linker, that is not like you.

It’s sad to see that your responses tonight have shown no appreciation for this simple fact when it was repeatedly brought to your attention.

Perhaps you will find another community that better suits your interests.

Since June of 2007.

All you needed to do in the original comment was provide a link or even say, this is from the NYT if you didn’t have the actual link.

so it is baffling why this one omission is anything more than an oops moment.

You’re not baffled–the article was a list of figures. You wanted them paraphrased or the quote attributed. You’ll get that believe me.

Are you baffled about the rudeness of talking past people in front of them? Most people learn not to do that as children–but apparently a large number of people here didn’t.

Being rude to RBG, who is the Site Administrator, is not wise. I’m going to assume you didn’t realize his position since you are new. He is trying to give you some guidance so that you can remain a commenter in good standing.

I’m not being rude to RBG. RBG has been personally responsible for holding my comments up which were perfectly appropriate for weeks after I used a name for Clinton that hundreds of publications use, and blocking scores of comments that had no personal comments to anyone, no name for Clinton other than Clinton(which would bring voters against her out in record numbers alone), and keeping me from participating in several book salons without any premise or explantion whatsoever. So I quit bothering.

What part of that do you think I don’t realize has you in a sweat–and again these were a list of numbers–nothing else?

Again I’ve been commenting since June 2007. I don’t know what constitutes new for you. I have made hundreds of comments, and the comments come from me and are cited from me.

I understand you’re in a sweat because when I quoted figures and they were a large number of figures, I lifed them from the sentences of the Times. However many of the figures were my sentences. You’re hung up because I didn’t paraphrase the figures. Given the numbers I would have had to list them or paraphrase them to make you happy. I normally link–I didn’t then because I interspersed my own analysis into the figures.

If you think at Mass General that the cuts are confined to teaching hospitals instead of the many areas I listed…

My comment at 6:14 is about teaching hospitals but by no means suggests that cuts are only coming there.

What I may or may not say to Valley Girl need not concern you. I am not interested in discussing her behavior but yours.

You are a new commenter who is getting into some trouble by posting material written by other people without attribution, the two paragraphs from the NYT. All you needed to do in the original comment was provide a link or even say, this is from the NYT if you didn’t have the actual link.

Then when you were corrected, all you needed to say was hey I’m sorry, I forgot to provide the source or the link. I’ve seen your comments, you generally provide a lot of links, so it is baffling why this one omission is anything more than an oops moment.

Being rude to RBG, who is the Site Administrator, is not wise. I’m going to assume you didn’t realize his position since you are new. He is trying to give you some guidance so that you can remain a commenter in good standing.

Please take a step back and think about your behavior, not the behavior of anyone else. We are trying to make it possible for you to remain a part of our community.

From “Valley Girl”:Thank you, eg. I was trying to come up with a response. And, it would not have been nearly as gracious as the one you just made.

We criticize ideas, not each other.

Those standards would imply that people don’t passively agressively criticize each other by talking passively agressively past the person they’re criticizing which was precisely what VG did.

And they’re called being civil not childish, and being old or new here doesn’t excuse anyone from understanding them. Is it common for you at Mass General or any other setting medical or non-medical to go around whispering about people while they’re in the room? Is that within normal limits for you?

That’s not what V Girl did in her snide criticism of me directed in a comment to you. She or he wasn’t criticizing ideas–she was criticizing me.

I have the standards down, as I’ve told you. Valley Girl’s criticism was directly aimed at me, and she used a passive agressive way to do it. I’d say you ought to do some reminding to Valley Girl.

Or do you mean as long as the snide criticism is passive agressive and people talk past an individual to someone else as quite a few people who have forgotten their manners hear are prone to do(I can show you plenty of quotes) that it’s acceptable? Or do you perceive that what Valley Girl directed at me posting to you wasn’t direct criticsm?

I was responding to precisely that kind of snide, snarky criticism for Valley Girl directed at me but posted to you in typical hypocritical fashion.

Yet I’m not talking here to Valley Girl, but to you. Regardless of what other people do or not, it would be advantageous for you as a new member of the community to learn what the standards are for how we treat each other. Pointing to someone else and saying they are out of bounds does not excuse your own criticisms.

We criticize ideas, not each other.

Thank you, eg. I was trying to come up with a response. And, it would not have been nearly as gracious as the one you just made

Keep trying.

I was responding to precisely that kind of snide, snarky criticism for Valley Girl directed at me but posted to you in typical hypocritical fashion.

My point was and still is, that a lot more medical cuts are coming than those confined to teaching hospitals that interfere with patient care. Some of them will impact care and research for the diseases that the most affluent of the Republican base will get, and many of them won’t.

Neither Obama nor Clinton addresses getting care to the poor, or a number of medical care issues in detail, or the remedies for the Bush cuts, and obviously McCain and Romney don’t have a clue except that they want people who can afford the care McCain can get at the Senate or Romney can afford to get it.