'Quick Reply' editing options

[echo_trail]

Greetings fellow forumers and/or moderators.
I'm a big fan of quickreply, and I'm a big fan of editing my text, ya.. I was wondering if you guys could put a few of the editing buttons on top of the 'quick reply bar'? I know it's just a matter of me being lazy for not just clicking "add reply", but I'd really like this. Just the most commonly used like, Bold, Italicalized, Underlined, 'Insert Image' and 'Insert Hyperlink'.

Thanks anyway,
echo_trail

[001 Amped]

yeah just put Bold, Underline, Italic up there

[Toumaz]

The thing is that a quick reply is meant to be quick.

And hey, it doesn't really take much effort to quickly add in a bold tag or two.

[SadistAtHeart]

I did this in quick reply.

[echo_trail]

I'm aware that you can use commands in quick reply's, but the idea is that it should just be a quick way to post, right?

[Toumaz]

Yes, and that's what it is - a quick, simple and slimmed down version of the full reply form. If you want the extra functionality, then simply click reply. IMHO there's no need to clutter the Quick Reply box any more than scrictly neccessary.

[Fluffy]

Well, I'm for this idea. Dunno why guys are against it.

[Zazikerng]

Meh. I agree with Toumaz, if you want to have butans to press, use the Reply function. And it's not like writing the BBCode for bold/whatever is that hard. Oh hey, I just did it.

[l0st_b0iz]

Its literally a click of a button away, whats the big deal?

[Keron Cyst]

I thought you came here often! It can't be THAT hard to memorize , , , [url], , and [img].

[echo_trail]

It's not, I just thought it'd be a cool idea, and it ain't too har adding either, right? If everyone's against it, I don't care. I just thought I'd bring up the idea..

Allthough, I don't think your 'counter reasons' are very good. I mean, I can understand why some of you would be like, "we don't really need this to survive", but none of you can give a good reason why Not to do it. Anyway, suit yourselfs.

[Keron Cyst]

Oh. In all actuality I'm only against it because the time may be better spent with server management, and it would increase every thread's length by a few pixels and loading time by a fraction of a second. If it'd help a lot of people and would be worth the board-modding time, I'm all for it.

[echo_trail]

Oh c'mon KC. ALot of time is being 'wasted' around the forum anyways, so editing this little thing probably wouldn't ruin the schedule

[bja888]

Turned off quick replay to stop my self from saying something stupid

[Zazikerng]

Turned off quick replay to stop my self from saying something stupid

That didn't help much, did it?

[a-4-year-old]

the hard commands like linking stuff should be the ones added to quick reply, so your lazyness doesnt have to find a link to a big long list of commands, which I think should also be included in both reply types.

[Toumaz]

What's so hard about ?

[FliesLikeABrick]

If you really want to work efficiently and like the quick reply then you can take the time to memorize the tags that you want to use.  Quick reply is for posting quick replies without the formatting buttons... this is why the Reply button exists.


If you want your little buttons for formatting, then use Reply, end of story.