Is there a way to quote a post in which another poster is quoted and not lose the quoted quote?
In a related question, is there a way to phrase that without making it sound like absolute nonsense 
I’ve never heard of this, but it sounds like a terrible idea. Just terrible.
We tried nested quoting briefly. It didn’t work out.
Highlight the quote that would normally be lost, rightclick “COPY”, then when you quote the original post reinsert it.
It can be done.
Go to the first post (the one with the quote that will be nested inside the other quote). Click the quote button.
A window will open up with the text marked with the appropriate quote html commands. Copy this text (highlight it and hit Ctrl+C).
Close this window. Go to the second post you want to quote (the one with the outer quote). Click the quote button for that.
Again, a window will open up with the text marked for quoting. Click you cursor right after the first html command and paste in the text you copied (Ctrl+V).
Now write whatever you want to add at the bottom of all the quoted text. Hit submit.
For example, here’s what the first section of this post look like (with braces substituted for brackets):
{QUOTE=Giraffe;14168914}{QUOTE=Scathach;14168844}Is there a way to quote a post in which another poster is quoted and not lose the quoted quote?{/QUOTE}I’ve never heard of this, but it sounds like a terrible idea. Just terrible.{/QUOTE}It can be done.
I liked it. I do not understand why it was abandoned. Posting a quote without quoted material often renders it incomprehensible, and using copy and paste is a pain, especially if you hit reply before you realize you need to do it. By contrast, editing out unneeded requotes is relatively simple.
Hmm, ok, bit of a pain if the quotes are on pages miles apart, but if that’s the only way to do it then that’s the only way to do it.
Cheers for the help guys.
Aha! And the way to describe it without sounding like I’m spouting gibberish. Truly, my cup overfloweth 
I think what it was was most people found they were editing out requotes far more often than they needed to keep them.
I’m okay with the lack of nested quoting. The little button by the quoted person’s name is fantastic; if I really need to backtrack in the conversation, I can just click that and jump backward through the thread easily.
FYI, a far easier way to give coding examples than the curly brackets is to use the [noparse][noparse][/noparse][/noparse] tags. For example:
[noparse]
[/noparse]
I just use Multi Quote (the icon to the right of Quote with the closed quote mark) for the first quote. Then I’ll click Quote in the second poster’s message. Both quotes will be there in a separate box. Nesting them is optional, people can tell from context which quote was in response to what.
But then I’d have to remember the noparse tag. And I often have to look up basic tags.
Really? It sounds like an awesome idea, I just wouldn’t want to be the one to suggest it.
No, it was the hamhanded who couldn’t keep from deleting more than they wanted to and leading to misattributions that made them pull the plug. Not the SDMB’s finest hour in regarding itself as a bastion of competent people.
Here’s a vote for bringing back __________ _________!
Who quotes the barber?
We had nested quotes returned for a while, but a few people had technical problems figuring them out (and a few more got carried away using them to annoy folks) and so TPTB took them away again. Shame, really, as it can be done manually, but it (generally) takes many more steps and much more time–particularly if the quotes are from off-board sources (e.g. news article).
We have been struggling badly without them haven’t we?
My board experience is lesser without them, yes. My point however, was not that the board could not function without nested quoting. It was that a board full of people who consider themselves the cream of the intellectual crop could not manage to highlight and delete just the extraneous stuff when they wanted to edit a nested quote. Ctrl+X is a basic computer skill.
I just click [multiquote] on the first one and
[quote]
on the second one. Then within my new message cut out the first quote and insert it into the top of the second one. Then add my pearls of, welll, something, at the bottom.
Yes, you have to be careful because the editor seems to like to grab *almost *the right thing. But it doesn’t require ube- guru technical wizardry to pull off successfully.
It was never as simple as that, but then you know this as the subject has been done to death.
Are we going to hear another shit-ton of rubbish about how we cannot use nested quotes, when the reality is that we are very capable of using them, we just don’t want to. The minute pain in the arse they bring is still greater than the minute benefit they bring.
You know all this, hell, the issue probably has its own section on your little spreadsheet, so I dont get why we need to do it all again? And frankly, the snarky little quips such as you use above, and which seem to be de rigueur for certain discussions these days, bring absolutely nothing of value to the discussion.