Maybe I'm weird, but I don't use or interpret quotes that way (as an appeal to authority). I use quotes that express an idea succinctly or cleverly, and the point for me is the language, not the source. I'm careful not to accidentally imply that the wording is mine, but other than that quotes are pretty independent of their originators in my mind.

(But I do frequently introduce a quote by saying "as someone said" to avoid derailing the conversation to be about that person)

"The people who are already born into money never know a real struggle, and for the others so often this struggle is so hard that it kills all pity. Our own painful struggle, that the selfish say we need, destroys our feelings for the misery we cause on our rise to become this so called success. I was forced back into a world of material insecurity, this fact has removed the curtain of this narrow minded and selfish world, and after reading, writing, searching, and questioning, that I may not have been able to do if distracted by the relentless pursuit of material wealth that seems to be the driving force in most people's lives, did I truly come to know humanity...

"I don't know what is worse, intention to social misery or inattention to it. We see both everyday among those who have been favored in fortune by birth or luck, or those who have risen to it by their own efforts. Or else the snobs, or at times the tactless and obtrusive condescension of the social elite who apparently 'feel' for the people. In any case these people sin against moral justice farther than their narrow little minds and twisted hearts are probably even capable of understanding or feeling. Consequently and much to their amazement, the results of their pathetic social charity efforts is next to nil, frequently infact an indignant rebuf, though this is passed off by them as proof of the ingratitude of the 'lazy street bums', that they themselves are partly responsible for helping to create in the first place."

-- Adolf Hitler

I agree, if we're talking about books. Further, I agree that some people are way better at making good quotes than others.

But even a broken clock is right twice a day-- and if someone has taken the trouble to excerpt a quote from an author (i.e., they have pre-filtered it for me), it does not take me significantly more time to read the quote than it does to verify that I like the originator. (Unless I know I'm unlikely to agree with the aesthetics of the person who made the excerpt, but that's a different story entirely!)

In certain contexts, I take ceteris paribus to serve the same social function as "IMHO"

I've never heard of that, and I have no idea why you would want to do that. Does anyone else actually use ceteris paribus to mean something like "IMHO"?

I used the term ceteris paribus because its literal definition is precisely what I meant. Going forward I will simply write, "all else equal." Ha, here's a chance to use it: All else equal, I prefer people quoting Moldbug choose interesting, pithy, and most importantly, enlightening, quotes. Its true this has the, IMO, unfortunate side effect of increasing Moldbug's status, but I consider that to be of secondary importance.

Note, I was making other points as well, e.g. a quote is more useful to me if people know and respect its author.

the whole point of a quote is that it is unique, therefore all other things won't ever be equal...

Original quotes are rarely quotes and never original

-The quotable Thom Blake

The whole point of saying "ceteris paribus" or "all else equal," is precisely that all else is not everyone will agree that all else is equal. In other words, saying "all else equal" implies "there may be other factors which matter."

In cases you are curious, those factors include: length, literal meaning, eloquence, humor, trustworthiness of author, wisdom of author, context in which it was written, persuasiveness, memorability, and more.

Writing "ceteris paribus" or "all else equal" is useful when it increases the precision of a statement.