POLL NOW CLOSED. Would you like to have the option to Quote posts on Talk threads (like MNHQ can)? Please come and cast your vote

[HelenMumsnet]

Hello.

We've had a few people asking us to extend to everyone MNHQ's Quote function (you know, the thingie where we can quote another person's post in our posts).

But we have also clocked a fair few folk who would rather Talk stayed as it is and didn't have a Quote function on threads.

So we have opened up a little poll to find out what the true picture is.

So what do you think? To quote or not to quote?

Do please feel free to discuss the issue with other Mumsnetters here on this thread, and please do vote and help us decide. (We'll leave this up for a good few days to make sure everyone gets a chance to contribute their tuppence ha'penny.)

NB: as it involves a bit of Tech work, we won't roll out the Quote option unless there is a clear majority in favour of it and, if there were, we would most likely test it in a specific topic (such a Chat) before putting it everywhere - just to check it wouldn't cause havoc.

Thanks v much, MNHQ

shame

Brilliant.

GML - there are other sites if you don't like the way this one is.

You can use a site and still think it could do with a bit of updating

How is a site, that takes into account its users views, in the dark ages?

I voted for quoting but I LOVE the fact Mumsnet actually goes to the trouble of asking its members and then takes note of what they say.

(Facebook, listen and learn....)

Good. That quote function is ridiculous. Another forum I am on you scroll through loads of quoted posts then get an "I Agree" at the end. Pointless.

Hurrah!

I voted yes

Yes well, we all know you like to be awkward

I do like to go against the luddites grain

"looking through this thread there seem to be very few"

Of course, for a vote to be worthwhile properly done comprehensive, it really ought to be announced via e-mail to all MN members ...

(instead of announced in a specialist sub-section of the site... wonder how Site Stuff compares in terms of unique or even total views against other sections - how about a "top 100 topics", so it's possible to see where Site Stuff comes in terms of viewers?)

... and probably needs to run for 2-3 weeks to allow for people who had not spotted it because of other priorities at work/home.

Sorry to be picky, and I'm not a specialist in doing surveys, but 500 votes out of whatever the total membership is, may be way under 0.5% and could be statistically meaningless [harsh term, perhaps, but the only one I could consider appropriate for such a small number]

Of course, if it was announced via e-mail, my full apology will be forthcoming.

It was stickied at the top of Active - if you don't go to Active and don't look around and only ever go to AIBU then of course you will miss out on things.

And really it's their website and they can do what they like.

If they want to give an illusion of democracy that's very nice, but MNHQ haven't actually promised to do what the survey results suggest, and I imagine if there are ever any issues about which they care strongly one way or the other they won't ask us, they'll just do it.

I do very much like the notion of a website being stuck in the dark ages. Now history wasn't exactly my forte at school but I don't necessarily remember the feudal system being vociferously debated on aibu at the time. I may have skipped that chapter of An Idiots Guide To History in order to look at the chapter on medicine and the ancient art of trepanning.

Networkguy - you are conveniently forgetting that the thread was featured as a sticky for the entire week that the poll was open, so anyone who clicked on to Active Conversations would have seen it. If they didn't feel strongly enough to vote, then they probably if anything are in the "Don't Care" bracket. It certainly wasn't hidden away.

The fact that the poll results were pretty consistently 2 to 1 against throughout the duration would suggest that if it were to go out to all the members in an email, those proportions would probably have been reflected in a wider pool - with the only thing perhaps increasing being the "Don't Cares".

I spy sour grapes.

You spy wrong, SoupDragon - I don't mind either way on this one, and didn't actually vote - I can see the pros and cons (and questioned, early on, whether 'trimming' was possible or not, because without that ability, I would think it a poor facility).

Whether it is a sticky or not, it does depend on a reader coming to this topic. I appreciate MNHQ can do as they wish, and aren't bound by the results of the poll, should they wish to introduce it quietly in 18 months, but I did question the likelihood of the vote being statistically valid, and (on a primarily curious note) which topics had most viewers on, say, a monthly basis, to get an idea of whether many or few visit Site Stuff.

Maryz - "should people who use a site more often have more of a say in how it is run".
and "people who use the site are more likely to see a random poll"

Interesting that you assume that heavier users are more likely to see a poll.

Some time back there was a forum "monitoring" website (which has since stopped working) which showed some addicts individuals were posting over 500 messages a week. I consider them the very heaviest of MNetters, but there is absolutely no guarantee that any of the time spent on MN was looking at Site Stuff. Sure, one could argue that everyone ought to visit at least once a week, but that was why I suggested a mailshot about the poll, so even those who don't visit on a regular basis, or don't visit Site Stuff, would be aware of the poll taking place.

My view was (and is) that it may be the case that many of those who have been using MN for years will glance at Site Stuff more often than newcomers, and thus the 'status quo' may be artificially maintained if new ideas are constantly voted down.

Again, I stress, I don't have strong views either way on quote boxes, though I've seen plenty of comments against, and when over-used, or without the ability to 'trim', I agree they can be a nuisance.

As for the several comments about boxes within boxes, and quoting followed by a one-line comment, that is perhaps where, full circle, a "thumbs up" would do nicely :)

You don't have to look at Site Stuff to see it, you only have to look at Active, as this was stickied.

NetworkGuy, you are aware of active conversations, aren't you?