The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
The reply quoting button.
It's moronic, pathetic, and used by people who have no excuse.
I really think the forums will be a better place without it, and I expect also that many people will agree. If you want to repeat something, CTRL C, CTRL V, you've done it for the reviews, so why can't you do it for a sodding line?
Please, really, this would make a hell of a difference.
It's moronic, pathetic, and used by people who have no excuse.
I really think the forums will be a better place without it, and I expect also that many people will agree. If you want to repeat something, CTRL C, CTRL V, you've done it for the reviews, so why can't you do it for a sodding line?
Please, really, this would make a hell of a difference.
Page:
The Reply Quoting button is extemely useful, I reckon.
If you're only replying to the previous post, it's not necessary, but if you are replying to a post on a previous page, it doesn't always make sense unless you quote the message.
Sure, you can cut & paste, but then it's not so immediately apparent which text is quoted from the original message - and it's a pain manually typing '>' for each line.
And you don't have to leave the whole message in - only the relevant parts; it's easy to delete the rest.
The only problem with the RQ is that it doesn't work properly - the first line of paragraphs has no '>', and is broken in an odd place. That needs fixing! If I'm quoting a fair amount of text, I always take the time to straighten these out, so that it's easier for people to read.
If you're only replying to the previous post, it's not necessary, but if you are replying to a post on a previous page, it doesn't always make sense unless you quote the message.
Sure, you can cut & paste, but then it's not so immediately apparent which text is quoted from the original message - and it's a pain manually typing '>' for each line.
And you don't have to leave the whole message in - only the relevant parts; it's easy to delete the rest.
The only problem with the RQ is that it doesn't work properly - the first line of paragraphs has no '>', and is broken in an odd place. That needs fixing! If I'm quoting a fair amount of text, I always take the time to straighten these out, so that it's easier for people to read.
*Begins his impression of an American cheering on a friend/relative/sportsperson*
Yeah!! Woo!! You go Joe!! Yeah! Woo!!
Yeah!! Woo!! You go Joe!! Yeah! Woo!!
Grix Thraves wrote:
> Yeah, that's fine. Wonderful intellgient people.
But unfortunatly there are
> some real dumbasses on here too, and if you want to stop babies from throwing
> crap, take away the crap, don't tell them to stop doing it.
But then they don't learn.
I read through most of the posts on here, and the reply quoting message button is rarely abused to such a level that it's a problem, especially if you consider how much is posted every day.
My personal opinion (not just cos I work here) is that it's useful. For instance if I hadn't had it for this message then either a) you wouldn't know what on earth I was referring to, or b) I would have had to copy, paste, type who wrote the original quote etc and wasted time and effort. I know you've said it's fine when used properly - so why get rid of it? :) Just quietly point out to someone who uses it incorrectly what they should be doing - don't start a fight or anything though, obviously ;) Or if it really is a problem, there's the Report to Moderator button.
Heh, there's probably going to be 10 pages of quoted spam for me to delete now isn't there? Damn dirty quote button! ;)
> Yeah, that's fine. Wonderful intellgient people.
But unfortunatly there are
> some real dumbasses on here too, and if you want to stop babies from throwing
> crap, take away the crap, don't tell them to stop doing it.
But then they don't learn.
I read through most of the posts on here, and the reply quoting message button is rarely abused to such a level that it's a problem, especially if you consider how much is posted every day.
My personal opinion (not just cos I work here) is that it's useful. For instance if I hadn't had it for this message then either a) you wouldn't know what on earth I was referring to, or b) I would have had to copy, paste, type who wrote the original quote etc and wasted time and effort. I know you've said it's fine when used properly - so why get rid of it? :) Just quietly point out to someone who uses it incorrectly what they should be doing - don't start a fight or anything though, obviously ;) Or if it really is a problem, there's the Report to Moderator button.
Heh, there's probably going to be 10 pages of quoted spam for me to delete now isn't there? Damn dirty quote button! ;)
No problem.
But who am I talking to? HEY? WHO?
:0)
But who am I talking to? HEY? WHO?
:0)
Grix Thraves wrote:
This looks messy. It's only
> really used to up word count, or just for really, really stupid people. Or for
> very sexy intelligent people trying to make a point.
Thanks!
This looks messy. It's only
> really used to up word count, or just for really, really stupid people. Or for
> very sexy intelligent people trying to make a point.
Thanks!
Look, I'm tired, I don't make that many mistakes, get lost.
:0)
:0)
Yeah, that's fine. Wonderful intellgient people.
But unfortunatly there are some real dumbasses on here too, and if you want to stop babies from throwing crap, take away the crap, don't tell them to stop doing it.
But unfortunatly there are some real dumbasses on here too, and if you want to stop babies from throwing crap, take away the crap, don't tell them to stop doing it.
I agree with Armatige, I usually quote the message and then take out the material that I'm not specifically replying too.
Armatige Shanks wrote:
> To be fair... I do use the 'Reply Quoting This Message' quite a lot...
And I
> often use ony one sentence...
However... it is quicker to just delete the
> extra text than it is to cut and paste then add the required '>'s then add
> the 'XXX wrote :' especcially considering that a lot of regs use unusual
> characters?
Also, when there are long posts which make a lot of points, Ive
> noticed people stating putting their responces after each papragragh of original
> text... spending a lot of time sorting out the original post will take some
> time...
I think having to do a lot of editing may put people off who are
> intending to write larger replies to larger posts, where they have to make a lot
> of effort formatting before they can make their point...
Whereas people who
> only want to stick a quick line in may just cut and paste a lot of text anyway?
This looks messy. It's only really used to up word count, or just for really, really stupid people. Or for very sexy intelligent people trying to make a point.
> To be fair... I do use the 'Reply Quoting This Message' quite a lot...
And I
> often use ony one sentence...
However... it is quicker to just delete the
> extra text than it is to cut and paste then add the required '>'s then add
> the 'XXX wrote :' especcially considering that a lot of regs use unusual
> characters?
Also, when there are long posts which make a lot of points, Ive
> noticed people stating putting their responces after each papragragh of original
> text... spending a lot of time sorting out the original post will take some
> time...
I think having to do a lot of editing may put people off who are
> intending to write larger replies to larger posts, where they have to make a lot
> of effort formatting before they can make their point...
Whereas people who
> only want to stick a quick line in may just cut and paste a lot of text anyway?
This looks messy. It's only really used to up word count, or just for really, really stupid people. Or for very sexy intelligent people trying to make a point.
To be fair... I do use the 'Reply Quoting This Message' quite a lot...
And I often use ony one sentence...
However... it is quicker to just delete the extra text than it is to cut and paste then add the required '>'s then add the 'XXX wrote :' especcially considering that a lot of regs use unusual characters?
Also, when there are long posts which make a lot of points, Ive noticed people stating putting their responces after each papragragh of original text... spending a lot of time sorting out the original post will take some time...
I think having to do a lot of editing may put people off who are intending to write larger replies to larger posts, where they have to make a lot of effort formatting before they can make their point...
Whereas people who only want to stick a quick line in may just cut and paste a lot of text anyway?
And I often use ony one sentence...
However... it is quicker to just delete the extra text than it is to cut and paste then add the required '>'s then add the 'XXX wrote :' especcially considering that a lot of regs use unusual characters?
Also, when there are long posts which make a lot of points, Ive noticed people stating putting their responces after each papragragh of original text... spending a lot of time sorting out the original post will take some time...
I think having to do a lot of editing may put people off who are intending to write larger replies to larger posts, where they have to make a lot of effort formatting before they can make their point...
Whereas people who only want to stick a quick line in may just cut and paste a lot of text anyway?
Page: