I have mostly gotten used to deleting a period or letter from previous posts, but I sometimes forget and the system edits my post to delete it. I get the idea, but when I quote a previous post, it is always a very short little question or statement I am responding to.
Is it possible to turn off that “system edit” it does when we quote the entire previous post?
You realize this only applies if you attempt to quote the entirety of the immediately preceding post, right? If you quote earlier posts, the quote is not deleted.
I think it’s a desirable feature, because people often pointlessly quote long previous posts, bloating the thread.
I recall that in another thread somebody (@LSLGuy?) suggested that it would be nice if a collapsed version of the quoted comment could be retained, rather than complete deletion, so it’s clear that you are in fact specifically responding the prior post. That seems to be the ideal solution, although it’s probably not something that could easily be implemented just for SDMB. Would be a good idea for all of Discourse, though.
Quoting a whole post is often a style mistake and is definitely a style mistake when you’re quoting the immediately prior post.
If, as you say, you are responding to a little piece of a prior post, as I am here, then just quote the small piece you want to respond to. As I am here.
Just in case you haven’t figured out how to do that …
Highlight the snip you want to quote. Wait a moment and a ghostly "Quote button will appear above the beginning of the highlighted snip. Click that. Do NOT click the Reply button at the post’s lower right nor the bigger Reply button at the bottom of the thread.
Partial quotes are helpful, not hurtful. We all can read the thread to get the rest of the context. Also, unlike VBulletin, the down-caret at upper right of the partial quote will expose a complete quote. Further, the up-arrow icon of the partial quote at upper right will auto-scroll up to the full post so you can see the surrounding posts for even more context.
That’s true whether it’s 1 post up or 1200 posts up.
You can even go one step further as I’ve done here.
I started by clicking the reply button on your post. Which displayed the blank edit post to type into. Then I highlighted the part of your post I wanted to quote and waited for the ghostly "Quote button and pressed that.
Which injected the partial quote into the reply edit box. Then I typed these words.
So now this post is a reply to your post AND separately a partial quote of your same post.
This technique works just as well whether the post you’re replying to is immediately above your reply or not.
Your second part is exactly why it’s not desirable. For some reason, while replying to a post without clicking the quote button will list it as a reply to your post, that doesn’t apply if the quote is deleted by system. And then that makes it ambiguous who you replied to.
And I’m not going to post without the quote, as I don’t know for sure that another poster won’t post between us. I can see them trying to post, but I’m unlikely to notice when they actually submit.
I actually don’t like the fact that it encourages any form of replying without a quote. What I’d prefer to see is that, if the quote gets too long, it gets automatically partially collapsed, with you being able to click to read the rest. And I’d do that with all quotes, not just the immediate predecessor.
But, until then, I just go back and edit all my posts if the quoted part gets removed. I’ll keep that up until I ever get around to seeing if I can set it up where clicking reply will also click the quote button and fixing it.
Also, just on principle I hate the “system” editing my post to remove things I deliberately chose to include. I had to click that quote button, and so I know how long the quote is.
I 100% disagree with that last part. It’s merely how the SDMB has always handled the situation. IF you want to reply to a post in its entirety (and not to only one part), you quote it. It’is just a community standards thing, not part of any style guide. And, for many if not most of us on the SDMB, it’s not desirable that it gets deleted. Just look at how many of us go back and fix the quote being deleted–it’s common enough that I assume those who don’t just didn’t notice.
I’ve been hurt by that several times. People will quote a single sentence of my post and reply only to that, even if, in full context, their reply doesn’t work, or their interpretation doesn’t make sense. And then I’ll see others run with that, seeming to forget the rest of my post.
I’m not saying it’s inherently bad. I split your longer post here, after all, discarding the instructions which are tangential to your argument. But it has to be used judiciously, or it can have downsides.
And, yes, I did split the quote rather than highlight it twice. I did at first find the highlighting to be neat, but I find myself using it less and less. When I want to reply, I’m more likely to just click the reply button since it’s there, and then, when the edit panel is at a usable size, it takes up too much room to easily highlight things after the fact. I can’t even see a whole paragraph at a time up there.
I find that, 99/100, it fits better with my flow to click the quote button and then edit out parts when needed. Plus that means I have to explicitly remove anything I want gone–so I’m less likely to forget and take what I did keep out of context.
Anyways, the point is that a lot of us don’t agree with your style guide, and that I do think quoting the bare minimum necessary can cause issues.
Simply click the expand button to expand and see the fuller context of the quote:
Absolutely. It pollutes the conversation with a bunch of unnecessary repetition for no reason whatsoever, and punishes all future readers, forever. That’s a bad deal. Instead, select and highlight the quote the specific parts you’re referring to:
There’s a bunch of other good advice in this blog post:
Feel free to share it widely!
(I do acknowledge that someone excessively quoting every sentence in a post and replying to that sentence in depth is a kind of unfortunate conversational griefing, but I don’t see it in the wild that much.)
You just did exactly what I was talking about. Only by taking that post out of context could you have thought I was asking for help in trying to see the whole post.
My post, in context, was about how the conversation suffers because people will take single lines out of context, as you just did. That’s why selective quoting must be used judiciously to make sure you don’t corrupt the original meaning. And thus it serves as a poor default choice.
We’re kinda big on that here: we consider it a misquote if you take something out of context. It’is forbidden to alter quotes here, because you cannot misquote.
It also seems odd to declare that your preference is better, when most of the special features of Discourse are things we’ve had to disable.
In particular, like-based sorting is a horrible idea unless you want echo chambers. That’s why we have likes removed. So is allowing flags to actually close threads–we’re constantly having to un-close them. Both make popularity more important than quality.
Furthermore, Trust levels as implemented are not good. Being good or prolific at posting has no bearing on whether people can be trusted to have new powers. That’s why we tried to neuter them.
Like it or not, quoting posts is not just a waste of space. Even the poster you are responding to says that it’s bad that we can’t tell if they replied to the poster above them or to the general topic. It’s confusing and is why most of us will continue to keep undoing the “helpful edit.”
It’s our community. We want to be able to do what works for us. There is no 1 size fits all. Please help us make the forum we want, rather than telling us why we’re wrong. We have over 20 years experience with what works for us and what doesn’t.
It sounds like you’re generally unhappy with every aspect of this transition. I’m sorry to hear that!
Have you talked to the mods / site owners about perhaps reverting back to the old forum software, to get things back exactly the way they were in the past? We’d be sad to see you go, but we could certainly assist in that reverse migration if needed.
Yeah, no. This community has been around for over 20 years. (I personally joined it 17 years ago.) We don’t need your heavy-handed style rules imposed on us against our will, thanks.
As for being unhappy with the choice to go to discourse, many of us are. Sadly, we don’t get to make the decisions.
i have repeatedly found discussions on this new site much more difficult to follow, and far less satisfying, than the old vBulletin. Removing full quotes of the immediately preceding post is one example.
B: Are you trying to get people to infer that taking something out of context is against the rules?
C: It is not now nor has it ever been forbidden to alter quotes here. What’s forbidden is very specific and you should know it.
D: I altered your quote, shall I report myself and we’ll see whether the mods have any problem with what I did?
If you reply to any post except the last one, without quoting anything, you get an indication (above the post on the right) of which post you were replying to, and you can click on it to display the post. As here, it shows that I am replying to a post of codinghorror.
That’s a very useful feature. in fact, I love the way the threading works here. You can immediately see which post is being replied to, as well as all the replies to a post, in place without scrolling.
If that pop-up link could be shown even when the post being replied to is the one immediately above (and not quoted), then that would solve the problem. You will be able to see whether a post is a reply to the previous post or to the whole topic, even though nothing is quoted.