yoregano said:When I say "uninspired," I mean your response offers little in terms of commentary. You haven’t addressed any of my real points, you just seem to globally endorse the typical use of quoting in the forum.I thought he addressed the issue dead-on. If quotes are removed, how would you suggest posters indicate who they are replying to?

Incorporating some of the other ideas in this thread, one alternative would be to keep quoting, but automatically collapse all but the last post when a user quotes an entire conversation.

yoregano said:can't seem to get to the whole of the argument (repetition, pointless quoting, lengthy posts, etc.).
It seems it is not the technical ability to quote that you object to, but rather how quoting is being used. If that is an accurate assessment, it would be far better IMO to solve the problem you perceive to exist by educating posters rather than removing a tool that is not the root source of the issue.

yoregano said:For some strange reason, many so far glom on to my "shocking" thread title (What?! Remove quoting? How scandalous!)What a surprise, you post a thread with a sensationalistic title, and people focus on the title. If you wanted to have a serious discussion, perhaps you shouldn't have gone with the "shocking" title. Something like "Can the Quote Feature Be Improved?" would have led to a much more beneficial conversation.

As far as how one might address someone without quotes, why not simply say their name? There are plenty of instances where this would work just fine. You don't have to restate fifty lines to make a simple reply.That still leaves the reply out of context. If someone is replying to a question from a different page, it can be very beneficial to see what that question was. Of course, you could argue that each person who replies should make sure to restate the question.

Pardon my boldness, but as I demonstrated above, as long as one can edit his own post, he can edit everything, including quoted text.You missed the point. If I quote you, then you go back and change what you said, everyone can see your original post in my quote, since you can't edit my post. While this isn't a primary benefit of quoting, it has come in handy a few times.

No, I don't need to reread a three paragraphs long post (as is often the case) to realize the context about what one is responding to.Sometimes it is necessary to read the entire original post to put a reply in context, especially if the reply picks apart arguments throughout the whole post. This happens quite a bit in FWF.

So what about your opinions on some of the other ideas brought up, such as collapsible quoting and multithreaded topics (which would eliminate the need to quote altogether)?

VBMcGB said:The above is an example of why I like the quoting feature. I can reply to specific parts of a post, and I can respond to different posters clearly. Nobody has to go up in the thread to see what I'm talking about; it's right there.

(Emphasis added above.) You are illustrating one of my points. By referring to specific parts of a post, you are intelligently and consciously editing, or at least considering so, when you quote someone else. But as I've said already, most people don't/won't be so thoughtful. The quote feature that automatically quotes everything—as it exists now—can be a rather clumsy tool. So can everyone please grasp my whole argument already? I'm not saying quoting has no purpose! I'm saying it needs improvement, ideally on both the part of the user as well as on the tool itself. Maybe some limiters to the quote feature, such as not automatically quoting more that ten or so lines at a time without prompting the user or some such, would help.

DevilMonkey said:It'd be interesting to see a quote feature which made quoting single lines or sections easier. Say, for instance, if you were given a copy of the post you were quoting, and could highlight a section and click 'quote selected' or 'quote all.' Easier than editing a post in a text box for some folks, I'm sure.
Hey, I think you're on to something. So when can we expect these changes to be implemented?

Glad to see some interesting thoughts and ideas being exchanged. There's hope yet.

*If* there was an auto-"ignore" for quotes, i would hope it would be a setting we each could enable/disable. Makes no sense to me to have to click multiple times (in one post or several depending on how the block would be implemented) to be able to follow the context of the discussion. Others may love it, I would hate it.

If posters are finding the technical task of quoting difficult, then DevilMonkey's suggestion of a "select-a-quote" function make a lot of sense. That does exist somewhat currently through use of the quote button in the toolbar, but simplifying it may satisfy those who feel quotes are out of hand while also assisting those who want that help.

Yes indeed, sure am glad to see that FW has realized the relevance of this idea and decided to make some worthwhile changes.