Use of the "quote" feature

The following two posts in this thread are comments which were made to the page on Kim Schmidtz.

The first post is the original comment. The second is the reply to that comment. The third post below is that same reply, but reworded without the quoting. Read them now...

I don't know anything about Kimble, but I think he has done one hell of a job. With his age and that achievement. He is some sort of an example for me. I certainly would like some advise from him.

I'm confused. You said you don't know anything but still have an opinion about him?


What do you mean? What exactly has he actually achieved other than being a broke criminal unable to ever pay back the damage he caused?

You want to be fat like him and be seen with pretty schickimicki chicks that everyone knows will never allow you to touch them?


Like what? How to best waste all your non-existant wealth made up by loaned money that you never earned and spend it efficiently on gold-digging hoes and still not getting laid?

I'm confused. You don't know anything but you still have an opinion about him?

What exactly has he actually achieved other than being a broke criminal unable to ever pay back the damage he caused?

He's an example to you? You want to be fat like him and be seen with pretty schickimicki chicks that everyone knows will never allow you to touch them?

The only advice he could give is how to best waste all your non-existant wealth made up by loaned money that you never earned and spend it efficiently on gold-digging hoes and still not getting laid?

So now my question. Which post do you find easier to read? Never mind the content or the spelling. I mean which style is easier on the eye? Is the original reply better, the one with all the quote boxes? Or do you prefer the reworded reply without the quoting?

I like the boxes because it's clear exactly which post you're talking about (especially important on a longer thread) and nobody can twist your words through rephrasing. Plus doesn't the quote box now automatically insert the name of the quoted person? I've seen that sometimes on the forum but I don't know where it comes from.

You didn't answer the question Gen. You are talking about quoting in general. I asked specifically about the two posts above. Which is easier on the eye?

quote boxes. easier to read and type.

I dont actually see the quotes in the second example.

That's right. There aren't any.

Ahh in that case I prefer the quote boxes. Rewording is ok, but relies on the poster putting more effort in while writing their posts. Quoting saves a lot of time both when posting and when reading, particularly when the quoted text is more than a line or two.

Ok Bob I'll try again to answer the question.


...the form with the boxes makes it easier to separate the reply content from the original post content.

"Easier to read" bzw. "Easier on the eye" -- sure, that's the rephrased version. BUT: "Easier to understand" bzw. "Easier on the brain" -- who said what and exactly how that person said it -- definitely the boxed version.

HOWEVER: I do think that this type of quoting is mostly used for and useful for nitpicking in arguments and starting fights -- if you want less of that on the forum then leave the quote feature disabled!

I definitly prefer the quote boxes, they are must easier to read and you don't have to search through them to find where the quote is and where the reply is.

Well, pertaining to the example given here, I prefer the non-quoting style.

Generally though, I think it's OK to quote part of another post, but the response shouldn't contain more than one quote box.

The second example isn't quoting, it's referring.

I prefer quoting, but I'm not sure I like the quote boxes this forum uses as they waste lots of screen space. A more simple

Quote: "This is a quote"

would be preferable...

YL6

To answer the question, I like the boxes. (But they are twice the size they used to be due to some 'art work' upgrades.) The boxes give us the impression that the words types aren't the poster's own. Plus, they don't have to be read again. They can be scanned. A quick scan 'reminds' us of what we read before and gives us our own gut reaction to the quote once again- offset by the poster's new comment.

To reword something and paraphrase it makes the speed reader's job much more difficult because they must re-read the entire post when someone should have just quoted it. Our reaction to the original wording is lost. Quoting is part of the internet forum board lingo. Don't dismiss it. (please?)

Plus, I liked the old quote feature better. The word 'quote' was there but without the cutesie snoopy style quotation marks on the right hand side. To me, now they look like something taken out of a hallmark greeting card cover artwork and to suddenly see them all over the board is very, well, cartoonish.

The old quote used to look something like:

quote:
The is a quote from some punter.

or: (if you actually used the quote feature, like some did)
Malcom Spudbury said on Oct 9 at 10:00pm:
This is a quote from Malcom S.

It was simple, and the box that the quote appeared in was still the same greyish offset that it is now- but without that silly billy gumdrops "open quote" "close quote" artsy-fartsy snoopy eyes type of quote that looks like it was designed by my sister in the 10th grade while she dreamed of NKOTB and drew puppies on her Trapper Keeper.

For a while there I was in denial. I would quote someone like this:
Quote:
This is a quote.
My response follows.
...just to not have to see the cutesie quotation marks in my post.

/my 2 (euro) cent

edit:
//personal record. first time I've used the 'huh' smiley.

Quote boxes deninitely. They are very useful to me when I´m trying to sort out some of the longer threads.

I prefer the direct quoting method, but I find multiple quotes tiresome. But as most people have difficulty rephrasing things, the quotes are better. But I agree with Profundo that the quote feature on this version of the board is big and silly. I also think that quoting someone who posted a one line message directly above yours to be silly too.

I think you should ditch the big silly quote marks and if possible replace them with the name of the user being quoted. I would like to know who it was who said that thing.

You can already add the name of the user being quoted.
If you write:

You get:

@ Spud

Perhaps it would be good if you could add that as a shortcut function?