Cannot distinguish reply to previous post vs reply to original post

Site Feedback
41

Except it isn’t, as you are the creator of the software in question, and you have designed the software so that it enforces that opinion. If it were up to our community, this would have already been changed.

Sure, sometimes it is clear who is being replied to. But it is often not. And, since the poster had to specifically choose to quote the other poster, and said quote is only removed after submission, the poster may not be aware that it is not clear who they are replying to.

Shortening quotes is great, but it’s not always possible. Sometimes the quote is already short. Even if it’s more than one sentence, all of the sentences may be needed for the quote to make sense.

There’s also a clear exploit. A user can click the “reply” button for the topic, yet reply to the other poster. The poster will not be notified of this reply. Yet, to all readers, there is no indication that the poster did not click the “reply to post” button. This could be unintentional, but it can also be deliberate. Either way, the person being replied to is not informed of the reply.

It would just be easier and not cause problems at all if the person you are replying to is always indicated in the top right of the post. It’s unobtrusive, takes up no new space, and prevents all of these issues.

To put this in software design terms: You can argue these are all edge cases. But part of software review is to find the edge cases. In well-designed software, it is not expected for users to have to work around those edge cases, but for the software to handle it gracefully. When reporting bugs, the fact said bug has a workaround doesn’t make it not a bug.

Discourse is decently designed in general. But it makes sense that, with software that is constantly being improved over time, a new, large community with tons of experience with message boards might find some edge cases you missed.

42

It’s open source, where’s your PR?

~Max

43

Well, you have a solution. Several solutions, in fact. :man_shrugging:

p.s. this is how HTML works by default…

44

Testing…

45

Testing, testing…

46

Nope. It deletes the quoted post and gives no indication which post I was responding to.

I don’t actually see any solution to disambiguate whether i was responding to the last post or to the op.

47

If only there was some kind of indicator arrow that could show who the reply was to…

48

Yes, this sums up the essence of the problem.

As many have said in other discussions, Discourse is excellent software that most of us are very happy with. I know I am. But there is a common theme running through most of the complaints such as this one, and that is that to the extent that we have issues with the UI, the issues are that the software tends to be excessively behaviour-targeted – that it tries too hard to drive what the designers view as “correct” message board behaviour, rather than just focusing on ease of use. These are things like “message too short”, “you’ve made too many consecutive posts”, “another user already posted this link”, etc. And that includes the annoying deletion of any full quote in an immediately following post (forcing us to use workarounds like omitting periods or using   or whatever, and the omission of the “Reply to” indicator both in immediately following replies AND in replies to the OP, making it impossible to distinguish the two. That’s just objectively bad design, albeit a trivial one that’s very easy to fix.

49

I think that’s a part of the issue. It’s almost like the board is designed to look like vB but act like reddit. I think lot of us (long time dopers) have stuck around here for so long, at least in part, because we didn’t like the way reddit works.

But the solutions are, at best, workarounds that, like so many other things on discourse,require prior knowledge of the problem/issue/bug and extra work on the end user’s part. The overwhelming majority of posters, new to this board, aren’t expecting the quoted portion of their post to disappear when they hit the button. And they’re certainly not going to know why it happened or how to fix it. The solution, IMO, is to call that a bug, not a feature, and fix it. I can’t speak for others, but adding [scrolls through thread] ‘&nbsp’, at least for me that has no idea what that means or if it’s common knowledge in some programming/mark up/mark down language ain’t gonna happen. As I said, I’ll just leave off a character somewhere, but again, it shouldn’t be necessary. And, the only reason I even know that is because someone figured it out (or maybe already knew) back when we first migrated over and I happened to see them mention it in a thread.

Well, like so many others, I don’t know html, so that really doesn’t help me. All it tells me is ‘that’s what the software does if I don’t tell it otherwise’. I can, however, add all the extra line breaks I want on reddit or vB or any other BB software I’ve ever encountered.

PS, did you know you can’t include the :man_shrugging: , that seems odd, in any case, ‘man shrugging’ kinda adds to my earlier point about the condescension. Instead of some actual reasons on why you can’t or won’t address some of the issues here, I get dismissed by way of an emoticon and a ‘whaddaya gonna do’ post.

I’m kinda curious if people on other discourse boards complain about the way quoting works. On the one hand, I have a hard time believing we’re the only ones bothered by it. OTOH, it’s the only good reason I can think of for the constant reply of ‘No!’ when we ask about changing how it works.

50

Looking at a post and having to wonder if it’s a reply to the OP, a reply to the post above, or a standalone post is getting extremely old.

This shouldn’t have to be, when the solution is simple- just include the redirect arrow whenever you reply.

51

Were you talking to me?

52

Or am I just talking to myself?

53

Three seconds, and … IMHO … relevant:

54

Yes, editing the post WITH NO WARNING is a bug. The software pops up plenty of other warning messages. I can’t imagine it would be hard to say, “you have quoted the entire prior post. That’s superfluous and will be deleted”. Then the user would have some clue, and wouldn’t be left scratching their head and wondering what they did wrong, and whether they have completely misunderstood how to use the “quote” features in the software.

I’ve had to explain to at least 3 different people how to quote stuff, because that confused them so much. Anything that actively interferes with users being able to use the software in basic ways seems like a bug to me, not a feature.

55

But it’s more than just that, it’s adding certain characters and having it adjust the font or do something else. BUT, there’s some character you can put in front of it so it displays as shown. IMO, the default should be WYSISYG, not the other way around.

56

test1

57

test2

58

Just a suggestion - if people are making test posts, it would be illuminating for everyone else reading the thread if they write into their test post what it is an example of, rather than just writing “testing” or something. E.g. [test - generated by replying to post X without quoting]

59

On the desktop interface with the default theme, your post #44 has a little dropdown that reads “1 Reply”. If you click on that it expands and shows post #45.

I don’t know how you did it, but somehow you got the parent post will link to the reply, without the reply linking back to the parent.

~Max

60

I was trying to copy puzzlegal’s test posts from earlier.

~Max