No, it pretty much was. A bunch of people sucked at cutting the right stuff and other people complained.
FTFY:
How’s that quotey pastey stuff workin’ out for ya?
BTW, (not directed at Buck), nested quotes ARE NOT THE SAME AS MULTIQUOTES. There is a lot of overlap, but the editing, snipping, parsing, combining, and grabbing (from off the Board) have nothing to do with multiquotes. MQs are fine, but please stop trying to equate the two.
I liked the nested quote feature for the short time that we had it and I find it depressing that it’s not allowed here because some posters were just too incompetent to use it without screwing up. I mean, it’s really easy to use, you just have to actually, you know, pay attention to what you’re doing if you delete anything from a nested quote.
I’m still of two minds about nested quotes. On the one hand, I enjoyed getting the extra context without scrolling/clicking back through the thread, and the superfluous quoted material never bothered me. So, that was an overall plus.
On the other, though, nested quotes did greatly increase the number of complaining about nested quotes, jacking up nested quotes, and complaining about people jacking up nested quotes, all of which propagated across the board and got really old really fast.
Overall, I call it a toss-up.
They should have kept the nested quote feature and banned the people who couln’t use it 
Could someone summarize what problems were encountered when nested quoting was enabled? While recently patronizing another message board,* I clicked QUOTE on a post that contained a quote and was first shocked and amazed, and then filled with unspeakable joy, when I saw the nested quote formatted automatically without requiring a bunch of manual copy-and-paste bullshit on my part.
- I would say which one, but I don’t want him to get a big head on his long neck.
Certainly my good man, though I can only speak for myself as is the case on all these big issues.
The actual formating of nested quotes is a huge red herring in these discussions. I and many others are perfectly capable of stripping out unwanted quotes, the issue instead is that I shouldn’t have to do this extra work.
You see, when I quote somebody, I am quoting only that one person and only that one quote. I have never wanted to include previous posts from earlier in the conversation because frankly the thread is there for anybody to read, if they are too dumb to keep up thats not my problem.
So as things stand, I quote a post, type my fucking amazing reply, and hit submit. Job done.
With nested quoting however, it seems that I also have to take the time to delete a pile of crap I never wanted to quote in the first place. Because the person I am quoting had previously quoted somebody else, I have to either allow a bunch’o’crap I didn’t want to stay, or I have to spend more of my precious time fucking about with it.
Now, is this a major problem? Not really, it doesnt exactly take hours to do. But then using capslock ahead of the shift key doesnt add much time to post creation either, and it is apparently important that I stop doing that.
If I want to reference a post from earlier in the thread, the multi-quote function does a spiffing job of making this possible. I can quote as many posts as I like, all at the same time yippee. But this is optional. Nested quotes on the other hand, appear every fucking post, so I have to format them every fucking post. Now why the fuck would I want to do that? Its extra work, and that aint gravy.
I am sorry that my explaining stuff skills are so paltry, but I hope this sheds some light on my opinion of nested quotes, and more importantly I hope it highlights the retarded nature of the claim that we “just dont know how to use nested quotes durrrrrr”.
Essentially, many people missed stripping out the second attribution, so if the full nested quote was this:
[ quote=second poster ] [ quote=first poster ] Blee blee [ /quote ] Blah Blah [ /quote ]
The result was this:
*[ quote=second poster ] [ quote=first poster ] Blah Blah
[/quote]
*
So instead of this:
The result was this:
[quote=second poster]
So a statement made by the second poster was being attributed to the first poster.