Changes to Quoting

[mc2fool]

And a second level will (currently) be accepted, but copy and pasting in a third just won't, the software will remove it when you Preview or Submit. Try entering the following (without the code block of course) and see what happens, just on a Preview.

Oh dear! It just gets worse and worse...

One may have to quote manually, outside of the 'quote' mechanism, as I usually do with outside sources: Quote marks plus Italics

What happens if you use anonymous Quotes, to quote a third party? The same thing, presumably. Will have to head to the Test thread...

My example was of anonymous Quote, and you don't have to head to the Test thread, you can, as I already said, try entering those quote blocks (without the code block of course) and see what happens just on a Preview.

If you find it easier, reply-with-quote to my previous post and edit out the code block and Preview. Note how it not only doesn't show deeper that 2 quoted levels, but it actually removes deeper ones from your source.

Of course, for outside sources you could try blasting readers with blocks of colour. viewtopic.php?p=575710#p575710 (Please don't!)

And a second level will (currently) be accepted, but copy and pasting in a third just won't, the software will remove it when you Preview or Submit. Try entering the following (without the code block of course) and see what happens, just on a Preview.

Code: Select all

[quote]level 1
[quote]level 2
[quote]level 3
[/quote][/quote][/quote]

This is nested quoting.

Yes. Nested quoting is exactly what this change and this thread is about ....

[XFool]

Here is my simulation of an imaginary TLF posting thread, in which all of the most restrictive posting measures are in place, as some on TLF desire.

"<Somebody makes a post...>"

"I agree"

"I disagree"

"With what?"

"Wiyh the above"

"I didn't say that. I sais"

"....."

"What?"

"You speaking to me?"

"No. The other one?"

"Me?"

"No! The other other felluw."

"Tht wuld be me thwn?"

"No!!!!!!"

[XFool]

Of course, for outside sources you could try blasting readers with blocks of colour. viewtopic.php?p=575710#p575710 (Please don't!)

I promise not to.

[csearle]

(i.e. I wasn't even the perp)

If you had consulted the record, as I did (and can still do), you were. C.

[XFool]

(i.e. I wasn't even the perp)

If you had consulted the record, as I did (and can still do), you were. C.

Nope.

Nor did I scream insults at people on the public BB. Nor did I send anyone an abusive pm. And I am not a TLF moderator...

[Mike4]

Having been involved in the recent stramash, I think that two levels of quoting are absolutely fine. Why are we quoting in the first place? To reference some point we want to respond to.

Exactly. So one level is all that is ever needed.

Any more is simply for the benefit of people who haven't bothered to read the thread and therefore don't understand the context.

[pje16]

Exactly. So one level is all that is ever needed.
Any more is simply for the benefit of people who haven't bothered to read the thread and therefore don't understand the context.

quite right too.
I give up reading posts where people quote masses, and you see a lot of posts on here where the quotes far outweigh the original text.

[Mike4]

Exactly. So one level is all that is ever needed.
Any more is simply for the benefit of people who haven't bothered to read the thread and therefore don't understand the context.

quite right too.
I give up reading posts where people quote masses, and you see a lot of posts on here where the quotes far outweigh the original text.

Me too.

A post with quotations ten times the length of the written response shouts to me that they didn't much about composing the post.

[mc2fool]

quite right too.
I give up reading posts where people quote masses, and you see a lot of posts on here where the quotes far outweigh the original text.

Me too.

A post with quotations ten times the length of the written response shouts to me that they didn't much about composing the post.

And sometimes some people didn't much about composing even short posts.

[XFool]

So one level is all that is ever needed.

Nonsense.

[chas49]

Moderator Message:
Please keep the discussion civil and on-topic! (chas49)

[Mike4]

Me too.

A post with quotations ten times the length of the written response shouts to me that they didn't much about composing the post.

And sometimes some people didn't much about composing even short posts.

Lol, at least I didn't quote five levels of the preceding discussion before not failing to spot I'd missed out the worm!

[XFool]

WRT the post by clariman: Quoting other posters - new limits and guidance

viewtopic.php?p=576085#p576085

IMO you (and others) are putting the 'blame' in the wrong place. Don't 'blame' the HTML tags and the quoting mechanism, blame the people involved - and their egos.

Though not involved, I believe the recent TLF example of this (surely faily harmless human error?) was sorted out easily enough by a thread moderator simply correcting a couple of mis-edited posts? I know myself this isn't always the case...

But consider: I have seen people misquoted who simply said in thread "I didn't say that" - as I have done myself. Indeed, I was I believe recently misattributed on a quote and didn't even bother pointing out the error (I even think somebody else pointed it out in the thread!).

Some on TLF seem to think something like this is a cause for a melodrama. For stamping their feet and calling for rules and restrictions on other posters. Perhaps the 'fault' lies with them rather than with any "mechanism"?

Moderator Message:
Moved post to this existing topic to avoid having multiple topics discussing this (chas49)

[servodude]

Perhaps the 'fault' lies with them rather than with any "mechanism"?

Perhaps
- but then there IS a mechanism (highlighting text in a nested quote then clicking the quote button) which leads to a misattributed quote in a way that a poster would not normally be expected to notice (the feature exists for convenience and having to adjust the name of the quotee after it is anything but convenient)

it is understandable how it happens but could be considered poor design

fewer levels of auto nesting should reduce its incidence and letting folk know they might have to proof their posts (especially if they've used the feature ) could probably solve the rest

[Clariman]

Some on TLF seem to think something like this is a cause for a melodrama. For stamping their feet and calling for rules and restrictions on other posters. Perhaps the 'fault' lies with them rather than with any "mechanism"?

I think you are adding an Act 2 Scene 2 and Reprise for the melodrama. The melodrama show ended its run last week. Individual errors in posts were fixed back then and those misquoted are now happy. To reduce the chance of it happening again we have made a minor adjustment to the nesting levels. All done. Noone else complaining that I am aware of.

C