If I have a manually added quote (ie a quote added using the quote button rather than by quoting another post), it is often a relevant part of the actual post (especially when it's in the first post in a topic), so it would make sense for those quotes to remain as nested quotes when that post is quoted (especially now long quotes are truncated). It wouldn't be too hard to achieve - just look for the attribution attributes on the quote before stripping it.

Edited January 30, 20214 yr by Colonel_mortis

 

If I have a manually added quote (ie a quote added using the quote button rather than by quoting another post), it is often a relevant part of the actual post (especially when it's in the first post in a topic), so it would make sense for those quotes to remain as nested quotes when that post is quoted (especially now long quotes are truncated). It wouldn't be too hard to achieve - just look for the attribution attributes on the quote before stripping it.

Nice suggestion, @Colonel_mortis

Do you have any visual examples handy by chance? Something like this? 
 

 

 

If I have a manually added quote (ie a quote added using the quote button rather than by quoting another post), it is often a relevant part of the actual post (especially when it's in the first post in a topic), so it would make sense for those quotes to remain as nested quotes when that post is quoted (especially now long quotes are truncated). It wouldn't be too hard to achieve - just look for the attribution attributes on the quote before stripping it.

Nice suggestion, @Colonel_mortis

Do you have any visual examples handy by chance? Something like this? 

I was just thinking they should look something like this ^ (but only with manually added quotes, not "real" quotes as in this example). Having pull quotes like in your example is also an interesting idea, and one that I could maybe see some sites using, although my use case is people quoting news articles, for which I don't think that would be super useful.

 

I was just thinking they should look something like this ^ (but only with manually added quotes, not "real" quotes as in this example). Having pull quotes like in your example is also an interesting idea, and one that I could maybe see some sites using, although my use case is people quoting news articles, for which I don't think that would be super useful.

I personally would also love that. I imagine this can be done somehow by adding a custom button to the toolbar and applying CSS to your theme. Not 100% sure but I'm almost definitely sure it can be done 🙂 

 

I personally would also love that. I imagine this can be done somehow by adding a custom button to the toolbar and applying CSS to your theme. Not 100% sure but I'm almost definitely sure it can be done 🙂 

Jordan...going back to the original request....at the base of the suggestion is the knowledge that when you quote somebody, it is placed in a quote. If someone then quotes that post, then the post is removed - see? I quoted your post above, and the prior quote isn't included.

Take that further...

  Quote

This is a manual quote - notice that there is no citation above? It is THIS type of quote that the original poster is requesting isn't removed when THIS post is quoted, but the one with a citation (the one above) is removed.

 

Edited February 2, 20214 yr by Nathan Explosion

From an end-user perspective, the distinction between the two is a bit confusing. I've struggled with it myself posting. It's not entirely clear that there will be a difference in result in using the "quote selection" popup vs. copying and pasting into a quote.

 

It wouldn't be too hard to achieve

vs.

  Quote

 just look for the attribution attributes on the quote before stripping it.

In fact, sometimes it's easier in a longer thread to go copy and paste bits.

Might this be better served in your use case, @Colonel_mortis by adding a custom button to the toolbar that handles these quotes from external sources? Or, a toggle when inserting the quote that allows you to choose between internal/external (or, heck, a built in citation).

I'd love the ability to quote, with a built in link to the original source (nytimes.com/article/etc.html) as you can currently link back to the original post.

 

Jordan...going back to the original request....at the base of the suggestion is the knowledge that when you quote somebody, it is placed in a quote. If someone then quotes that post, then the post is removed - see? I quoted your post above, and the prior quote isn't included.

Take that further...

 

AHHH I understand now. When I tried quoting your entire post, the only quote that was loaded was your first one, not the second. Is that right? 

In this example, it would quote your first quote and then attribute the second quote to you. Sorry if I am still not understanding 😆 

 

AHHH I understand now. 

I believe Invision used to function this way, right? But it was changed to the format of how it is now in an effort to reduce how long posts could potentially be. 

However, that was prior to the expanded/collapsed quote feature.  

So basically, we're looking for functionality that includes all the quotes being quoted versus the most recent post, right? 

Perhaps there's a way to truncate the amount of quotes to maybe ~3-5 as a limit to keep things semi-truncated. 

Thoughts? 

Nope.

You are probably thinking about this debacle ("Quote embedding") which was possible if a user quoted a post with a quote in it.....and so on.

  Quote

Blah

  Quote

Blah

  Quote

Blah

  Quote

Blah

  Quote

Blah

  Quote

Blah

  Quote

Blah

 

 

Nope.

You are probably thinking about this debacle ("Quote embedding") which was possible if a user quoted a post with a quote in it.....and so on.

 

Omg you are quick lol. I edited my post. Can you refresh and tell me if I'm understanding it correctly now? 

Let me break this down easily....

If you quote this post then this quote will be discarded...

 

Thoughts?

But if you quoted this post then this quote wouldn't be discarded...

  Quote

This content etc etc.

@Colonel_mortis - feel free to step in if I am getting the wrong end of the stick here.

Edited February 2, 20214 yr by Nathan Explosion

 

Let me break this down easily....

If you quote this post then this quote will be discarded...

But if you quoted this post then this quote wouldn't be discarded...

@Colonel_mortis - feel free to step in if I am getting the wrong end of the stick here.

AHHHH. Ok I see now. Sorry things got a little lost in translation. 😆  

So we want to keep quotes in like this

  Quote

To be or not to be. That is the question. 

But quotes that are replies to other members get discarded. 

The first thing that comes to mind is changing the overall look of quotes like the one above, essentially offering two types of quotes:

1. A reply to someone
2. An actual quote

Maybe the #2. looks like: 

Am I finally understanding it lolol? 

 

Let me break this down easily....

If you quote this post then this quote will be discarded...

 

But if you quoted this post then this quote wouldn't be discarded...

  Quote

This content etc etc.

@Colonel_mortis - feel free to step in if I am getting the wrong end of the stick here.

Exactly

 

 

AHHHH. Ok I see now. Sorry things got a little lost in translation. 😆 

So we want to keep quotes in like this

  Quote

To be or not to be. That is the question.

But quotes that are replies to other members get discarded. 

The first thing that comes to mind is changing the overall look of quotes like the one above, essentially offering two types of quotes:

1. A reply to someone
2. An actual quote

Maybe the #2. looks like: 

Am I finally understanding it lolol? 

Yeah, some sort of styling difference between the quote types might make sense. I think I'd want something that stands out slightly more than that, such as by adding a left border, such as stack overflow:

Edited February 2, 20214 yr by Colonel_mortis
Did it wrong :/

 

Exactly

Interesting...my manual quote stayed in the content when you quoted the post. Maybe it already works as requested?

 

Interesting...my manual quote stayed in the content when you quoted the post. Maybe it already works as requested?

I cheated, it doesn't do that by default.

I had hoped you would say that!!

 

Exactly

 

Yeah, some sort of styling difference between the quote types might make sense. I think I'd want something that stands out slightly more than that, such as by adding a left border, such as stack overflow:

Yea I love this. Let me write something up and share it with the team. Please keep in mind guys I have so many ideas for them to review so give us a sec please. 😆  But yea this makes a lot of sense. 🙏 

Got a little update: we're a bit worried that topics with nested quotes could get slightly out of hand, however from what I am told there is potential for this in a future minor release. 🙂 @Colonel_mortis

So, this should not be a new concern.  Nested quotes are a fundamental function of forums since, like, the beginning of time.  

Here's some market research for the IPS team:

There are two pain points raised by users of this other platform's plugin for nested quotes:

• Notifications
• Limit of how deep

 

So, this should not be a new concern.  Nested quotes are a fundamental function of forums since, like, the beginning of time.  

Here's some market research for the IPS team:

There are two pain points raised by users of this other platform's plugin for nested quotes:

• Notifications
• Limit of how deep

I feel you. I also think nested quotes are important. Implementing does create some major roadblocks for the Invision software. One of the hurdles I'm told is that the HTML is stored as you see it, so if you switched it on and had nested quotes, switching it off wouldn't remove the nested quotes without rebuilding all the posts.

However, there wasn't a flat out "no, we won't consider this" which I think is a great starting point. I also see the benefits and value in nested quotes. 

Thoughts? 

 

I feel you. I also think nested quotes are important. Implementing does create some major roadblocks for the Invision software. One of the hurdles I'm told is that the HTML is stored as you see it, so if you switched it on and had nested quotes, switching it off wouldn't remove the nested quotes without rebuilding all the posts.

However, there wasn't a flat out "no, we won't consider this" which I think is a great starting point. I also see the benefits and value in nested quotes. 

Thoughts? 

PRO

• The problem with the current quote system is that the system literally skips past quotes, which leaves gaps in the conversation.   It's a gaping         in technical or in-depth conversation (see what I did there?). 

CON

• If you switched it on / off, you would need to rebuild all the posts. 

On balance, I don't see admins flipping the toggle for nested quotes and triggering a rebuild often.   

 

Thoughts

I think nested quotes are an absolute mess waiting to happen, and I am glad the functionality was removed with the move from 3.4.x to 4.x

+1 for nested quotes. They're a big miss after moving from SMF.

 

+1 for nested quotes. They're a big miss after moving from SMF.

Tbh I would be curious to see how these would function in an IC community as well, but from what I gather it would require a big ask on the back-end when an admin wants to switch from the default setting to nested.