I would quote you, but I canât. So if in the future this post makes no sense, please scroll up and spend more time to read through the whole thread to see what I am replying to.
It is cha ges like this that seem like only causelj g each user a minute per post. This adds up to thousands, if jot millions on minutes wated and fucks not given in real conversation. If they wanted to save space on the nav bar, get rid of bold, italics or smiley facesâŚthe quote function is critical to user operation. As well as for context with long form conversations.
Not just an obvious critical mistake, a likely cause of future user die off. Almost seems intentional how dumb this is.
If there is a proper reason, outside of bar space, letâs hear it. Itâs a moronic move unless they point out the financial problems it may be causing? Which I guess is possible. But now itâs a pain in the ass.
At least we arenât full on subscription service yet
This is again something that I know next to nothing about, so I fully expect to be shot to pieces once more, but here goes anyway! Is there any chance that this could have been a move to discourage people from simply hitting âquote whole postâ because it was easier? Maybe if the standard was to quote the whole post (including sometimes photos etc.) this was using up more storage space? It seems that a quote in a post is not simply grabbing the data from the original post every time it is âreadâ, or displayed for a user, but at the moment of writing a copy is made of it. Because a user or moderator can edit a post, but if the quote was made before the edit, then the quote stays like the original.
Or are we talking such tiny differences in data size that this could never have been a possible motivation?
Anyway, itâs back, and thatâs the main thing! Thanks, @Marco, @tempogain, Uncle Tom Cobley and all.