Please can people respond with the original message included

Add post doesn't quote though.

This is quote, got it now I usually scroll to the end and post, add post is quicker

Just checking what the buttons do, this is add post

Oh gosh I didn’t understand what you were on about until I just opened a thread where OP is doing exactly that in every single post and it is impossible to follow! You are not unreasonable.

I rarely use the quote function. I might @ someone if I'm agreeing with them or want to talk specifically about something they've said. If anyone else on the thread is sufficiently interested in my pearls of wisdom they can go back and look, but I don't think people generally are interested in what other people have to say! The threads usually aren't a discussion, they are linear for the most part. In reality, most people post one thing on a thread and then never go back to it.

When two posters start having an argument between themselves that becomes incredibly tedious and I either step over them or leave the thread.

The quote function has made an absolute mess of Mumsnet, it's quite a recent addition and I don't think a good one.

I must admit I prefer the quote function. Some of those little arguments people have are entertaining. I don't care if the OP is quoted either.

I don't like the tagging. It doesn't have much use imo.

Yes.
But it's essential for people to quote other posts if they want a thread to make sense.

Obviously it's maddening if a bunch of idiots decide to quote the whole OP.

That's not what OP means.

I think everyone is in agreement that quoting the whole of the OP is redundant in any response.

What do you mean "only OP should be allowed to quote"? Is what I'm doing now i.e. quoting your post in my reply a problem for you?

I vaguely agree, but think the OP should be the only one allowed to quote. I really hate the conversations that go on for ages only for someone to quote the long opening post on page 10. Really enjoy scrolling past that for the 17th time.

Right, I was also tired so tired typing and tired reading meant no understanding

Yes, I agree, the @ function is pointless most of the time. Either copy and paste the relevant bit you are replying too (and either bold or italicise it) or use the quote function.

@Dahliasarebeautiful disagree

And yet, everyone else read it perfectly fine?

The kids don't say word salad either btw. MN says it, FB says it and all the other places frequented by the middle aged.

I agree op. It doesn't even help if you do read the whole thread because unless you can actually remember every single name the answers are still pointless.

Some OPs will post in the morning and then disappear until after work for example (which is fine, of course) but if there are ten pages of posts and the OP responds "yes, penisbeakersdoitbetter"

I'm not scrolling back ten pages because I have no idea what that poster originally asked.

I think the OP was something about carrots? I planted mine out a couple of weeks ago. They are coming through nicely now, but do need watering if outside. I am sure you are OK to still plant - especially as the recent rain has made the ground more receptive.

I think the format means it will always be difficult to follow conversations.

I prefer Reddit’s style, where responses are actually in response to the comment.

Also avoids the (annoying!) issue where you repeatedly get the same reply to a post even days later, as people aren’t reading the ongoing conversation.

For those that don't understand what OP means, here is an example.

OP - posts a question
Ann replies
Mary replies
Lucy replies
... many pages of replies
Sandra replies

OP comes back and replies like:
Thanks for replies.
@ Ann - I agree, but bla bla bla
@ Sandra - No that's not what I meant at all. It's his stomach.
@ Mary - it's 4 foot 5
@ Lucy - it's green, but I'll try the blue.

The reader who has filtered to read just the OP's posts will have no idea what OP's reply means. The posters (Ann, Sandra etc) will, but no one else unless they search through the whole thead.

Instead she could compose her reply as:

Thanks for replies.
@ Ann
You could try reversing into the space - I agree, but bla bla bla

@ Sandra
If it's his chest then you need this product
No that's not what I meant at all. It's his stomach.

@ Mary
How tall is the fence
it's 4 foot 5

@ Lucy
What colour is it, mine is blue and works really well
it's green, but I'll try the blue.

I think she means that if an OP is responding to multiple posts in a single message then they might as well use @ all rather than @ [individual poster] to indicate she's condensing all her replies into a single post.

It's a bit strange to claim it's dull and bizarre when you don't understand what the OP is asking.

I search in a web browser as well; not so easy when you're on your phone.

We know you can read the whole thread and work it out, OP is saying that (especially when the thread is pages long) this is pretty time consuming, so she is asking that people quote the relevant part of the post they are responding to rather than just the username of the post they are replying to.

I’ve seen OP’s do this on AMA posts and it’s just so pointless. Like yeah great, you’re giving loads of answers I just have no idea what the actual question was unless I want to trawl through pages of responses