Who's on first?

[Divalent 145]

"In Reply to:" no longer says the name of the person quoted/replied to.

Makes it hard to follow a nested discussion. Anyway to get the name of the person quoted automatically added (like it was before?).

(And what is the difference between "Quote" and "Reply"? Right now there doesn't seem to be any. (Kind of like the flammable/inflammable thing: why are there two?))

Seems like this is a step back in functionality and utility and clarity. (Was that the intention? I do note that it seems to be driving some of the people in the DB Cooper thread crazy (crazier?), so maybe it is a good thing. )

[Meso 38]

Hmmm, strange...

I was sure that it never used to give the name of the person being quoted. I know that the reply tag never has. But was sure that the quote tag didn't either... I tried to find some examples in old screenshots of it showing the names being quoted, and all the ones I could find didn't have that.

There is an issue with the reply/quote right now though, in that instead of bringing up the 'quote' tags, when you click on the 'quote' link, it brings up the reply tags. We're working at fixing this at the moment.

We're also working at getting it so that the quote box will bring through the name of the person you're replying to though.

At the moment, this can be achieved with a little bit of manual work. One can change [.quote] to [.quote "username"] to get the name pulled through in the mean time. But we hope to have this solved shortly.

Sans the fullstops of course.

It will look like this...

meso

Example of a quote with the username present

[Divalent 145]

Well, I concede I may have mis-remembered how it used to work. But since the current method of displaying a post uses the current rules, looking at old posts won't tell you what the old rules were. (You'd need to look at screen captures for that).

I'll note this link by to a post by a noted DB Cooper regular complaining about the same thing:

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4481693#4481693

For me, perhaps it was just the prominent "In Reply to:" which usually I take to require the name of the person (not what they said: that's what "quote" suggests to me).

So in any event, if I was wrong about how it used to work (not withstanding that others apparently think so too), then take my comment as a suggestion of how it might work better.

(IMO, "Quote" would be appropriate where you are commenting on something said elsewhere, and/or it's not really relevant who actually said it. "In reply to:" is appropriate where it is important to ID who said it. In a thread with a discussion,, it can be hard to follow if the speaker of each "round" of an exchange is not ID (particularly so if the exchanged is edited).)

[Meso 38]

We've managed to sort this out now, it should be fixed - and furthermore... It should now actually display the names of the person you're quoting when clicking the quote link on a post. :)