Please Stop Putting Quotes Under Your Responses...

[_NOPE_]

Know that this is a polite request, not a demand. I am not going to attempt to force you to post the way that I want you to post. Communication is two ways, there's a sender and a receiver. Both parties have to work to try to make communication work. If either part doesn't do their job well, then proper communication doesn't happen successfully. Here's a case where what some people on these forums is doing is causing issues for me communicating with them. I think sequentially, and I'm used to a sequential line of thought.

 

So, when you do this:

 

I see this:

 

When I first read that post, I read the response first, and I'm confused what the response is about. Then, I read further and I receive the full context. However, this is inefficient and confusing for me, because I have to flip my brain around several times to ensure that I have my items in the right order. However, if you do this:

 

 

This I see this:

 

Then I can make IMMEDIATE sense of the message, with the full context, because it follows a sequential flow. I said something, and because of that something that I said, you think I'm dumb. Fine, great! Message received! Well, not great, because that's not very nice, but the point is that the message got across MUCH clearer, and was fully understood without much work on my part. I like that.

 

Now, this is not such a HUGE deal when it's short posts like shown in the screenshots, but when the quoted text and responses are over a page long...it can get... troublesome. And when you have different people quoting in different orders, some placing the quote before the response, and some doing the opposite... it can get VERY confusing.

 

So, please, save my autistic brain and consider placing your responses to quotes AFTER the quotes themselves, rather than responding before placing the quote in the post.

 

[justicebeliever]

PK, you are dumb, and so is this opinion....+1 Inf, I would read this again...

 

Know that this is a polite request, not a demand. I am not going to attempt to force you to post the way that I want you to post.

 

So, please, save my autistic brain and consider placing your responses to quotes AFTER the quotes themselves, rather than responding before placing the quote in the post.

 

J/K - Makes sense to me - seriously, +1

[Mr. Vee]

Seems reasonable. Also I find it rather rude of your imaginary interlocutor to presume familiarity and abbreviate your name when insulting you.

[GamerKate]

 

...please, save my autistic brain and consider placing your responses to quotes AFTER the quotes themselves, rather than responding before placing the quote in the post.

 

I approve of this polite request and lesson in tidy post formatting

 

MCM

[RikOz]

I agree with Philotic Knight Olsen!

[Robotech_Master]

Ah, the age-old conflict over whether to top-post or bottom-post.

 

Bottom-posting originated back in the days when everything was done via UNIX shell. It could display relatively few lines (24 or 25, usually) and scrolling required keypresses and wasn't something you wanted to do too often. So the default mail/newreader client behavior was to top-quote and bottom-post, so people could scroll through the context before getting to the bottom where they would type their reply, or type their comments intlerspersed between chunks of quoted text. Flamewars raged over people not trimming the reply text enough.

 

And then the web was invented. Suddenly, scrolling was as easy as turning a mouse wheel, so there was no longer any need to make people sit through context if they didn't need it. They could read the reply right away, and only scroll down if they needed to refresh their memory. Hence, the default behavior of web email clients became to bottom-quote, putting the cursor at the top so they could start typing right there--and a generation of emailers and forum posters were trained to send their replies that way instead.

 

Which, needless to say, rubs all us old fogeys who came up on UNIX shell the wrong way. Damn you, Eternal September! :)

 

Some forums have particular preferences for quoting enforced--for example, the Baen Bar demands top-posting, bottom-quoting, unless you have responses to specific comments in which case it's okay to intersperse. Otherwise, I'm afraid you'll probably just have to adapt to the foibles of people trained to do it "the wrong way."

 

(Really, though, unless you're responding to something specific, there's not a lot of need to quote replies at all, since the original posts are right there for people if they scroll up. So you could look at it as having all previous posts "top-quoted" already. :) )

[Blastit]

Age-old? I've never seen people actually write their response above what they're quoting and I've been on forums for seventeen years. I guess I've somehow avoided overlapping my nerderies with the group who does that. Writing a general contribution above something you're quoting to respond directly to is one thing, sure, but not this. I see a lot more people who manually sign every single post they make.

[srmalloy]

The issue gets exacerbated by the fact that most email clients do this by default when replying -- your response is stuck at the top of the message so people can see it immediately, with the rest of the email thread cascading down underneath, where you can scroll down if you need to pick up context. So it's what a lot of people are used to doing/seeing.

 

[justicebeliever]

The issue gets exacerbated by the fact that most email clients do this by default when replying -- your response is stuck at the top of the message so people can see it immediately, with the rest of the email thread cascading down underneath, where you can scroll down if you need to pick up context. So it's what a lot of people are used to doing/seeing.

 

When I reply in-line to an email, my comments are always after what I am quoting.  That’s a choice, but the only way I have ever seen someone’s in-line email reply ever be done

[Apparition]

The issue gets exacerbated by the fact that most email clients do this by default when replying -- your response is stuck at the top of the message so people can see it immediately, with the rest of the email thread cascading down underneath, where you can scroll down if you need to pick up context. So it's what a lot of people are used to doing/seeing.

 

Google started that annoying trend with Gmail.  Before Gmail went into beta in 2004, quotes were on top as God intended.

[Stan The Man]

Then there are those strange people who just quote things out of context and don't even leave a message at all.  What's up with that?

[WanderingAries]

And for the love of god, can we Please not quote an entire thread when you're replying to just part of it? We've already read the original, so shorten that crap!

[justicebeliever]

And for the love of god, can we Please not quote an entire thread when you're replying to just part of it? We've already read the original, so shorten that crap!

 

Quoting you in entirety - but not to be sarcastic.  I’ve found it’s really hard on my iPhone to edit long quotes.  The UI isn’t really friendly to editing large pieces of text.  There is only a small amount of text shown, and the cut/copy isn’t that user friendly

[Pixie_Knight]

And for the love of god, can we Please not quote an entire thread when you're replying to just part of it? We've already read the original, so shorten that crap!

 

But quote pyramids are fun, aren't they?

 

I mean, I always heard they are.

 

Was I lied to?

 

Impossible!

[Zolgar]

Then there are those strange people who just quote things out of context and don't even leave a message at all.  What's up with that?

[DarthMaxus]

Pretty much every rule of foruming I have come across dictates that one put your quotes before your response, instead of after. It makes perfect sense.

[jubakumbi]

The only thing a non-conformist hates is a non-conformist that does not conform to the rules of non-conformity.

[OEM61]

If I quote something then I am responding to that particular thing.

 

I may add a general comment first, then the quote, then the response, or I may add the quote, a direct reply to that, and then a more general response, but yeah, it only makes sense to put the quote ahead of the response.

 

You said this, I am saying that in response.

 

If I am just making a general comment on the subject at hand or replying to the OP in a general way then no quote is needed.

If I quote someone, in whole or in part, then it is because I want to respond to those remarks specifically.

 

That should come before my comments for the sake of clarity.

[Roughtrade]

If I quote something then I am responding to that particular thing.

>snip<

If I quote someone, in whole or in part, then it is because I want to respond to those remarks specifically..

This.  I much prefer to see someone quote a specific thing which they are responding to.  Much prefer it over the ones who quote someone who is quoting someone who is quoting someone....  In theory, we are reading the thread.  There is no reason to quote half the thread in a post.  Just highlight the main point you wish to discusss for clarity.

[Pixie_Knight]

If I quote something then I am responding to that particular thing.

>snip<

If I quote someone, in whole or in part, then it is because I want to respond to those remarks specifically..

This.  I much prefer to see someone quote a specific thing which they are responding to.  Much prefer it over the ones who quote someone who is quoting someone who is quoting someone....  In theory, we are reading the thread.  There is no reason to quote half the thread in a post.  Just highlight the main point you wish to discusss for clarity.

 

I'll admit to occasionally participating in a quote pyramid. Especially if it's an amusing one. But in general I can agree with you.

[_NOPE_]

If I quote something then I am responding to that particular thing.

>snip<

If I quote someone, in whole or in part, then it is because I want to respond to those remarks specifically..

This.  I much prefer to see someone quote a specific thing which they are responding to.  Much prefer it over the ones who quote someone who is quoting someone who is quoting someone....  In theory, we are reading the thread.  There is no reason to quote half the thread in a post.  Just highlight the main point you wish to discusss for clarity.

 

I'll admit to occasionally participating in a quote pyramid. Especially if it's an amusing one. But in general I can agree with you.

[ed_anger]

ohai whats goin on here?

 

If I quote something then I am responding to that particular thing.

Hey diddle ho diddle Tippecanoe and Tyler too

If I quote someone, in whole or in part, then it is because I want to respond to those remarks specifically..

This.  I much prefer to see someone quote a specific thing which they are responding to.  Much prefer it over the ones who quote someone who is quoting someone who is quoting someone....  In theory, we are reading the thread.  There is no reason to quote half the thread in a post.  Just highlight the main point you wish to discusss for clarity.

 

I'll admit to occasionally participating in a quote pyramid. Especially if it's an amusing one. But in general I can agree with you.

[Robotech_Master]

You know, if you have trouble trimming quoted text down, you don't HAVE to quote any text at all...

[Mr. Vee]

You know, if you have trouble you HAVE to quote any text

 

Quoted for troofs  :D

[justicebeliever]

You know, if you have trouble trimming quoted text down, you don't HAVE to quote any text at all...

 

See I think this was directed at me, but I can't be certain, since you didn't quote me.  Sometimes the context matters...