# Ability to unroll context when in-reply-to indicator is suppressed?

**URL:** <https://meta.discourse.org/t/ability-to-unroll-context-when-in-reply-to-indicator-is-suppressed/18166>\
**Category:** Feature\
**Created:** [Julho 28, 2014, 1:54pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/ability-to-unroll-context-when-in-reply-to-indicator-is-suppressed/18166 "2014-07-28T13:54:27Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 10

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![anon73329944](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a9adbd/32.png) [@anon73329944](https://meta.discourse.org/u/anon73329944)\
**Post date:** [Julho 29, 2014, 7:58am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/ability-to-unroll-context-when-in-reply-to-indicator-is-suppressed/18166/10 "2014-07-29T07:58:19Z")

</div>

> [@codinghorror](#):
>
> The cases where you would realistically claim
> 
> Oh, I quoted something Joe said but I wasn’t talking to Joe
> 
> are exceedingly rare… unless you are “talking to” some world famous author like JRR Tolkien, if you are locally quoting someone you are referencing them and replying to them and engaging them in the context of other local ongoing conversations. That’s the entire purpose of discussion software.

Perhaps I’m “talking to” some reputable member of the community who has made a post with an explanation, and I’m using his words as an argument in a related discussion, but not the one it’s been posted in.

You have a popular blog (and are quite fond of quoting it in arguments) - would you really consider everybody doing so “talking to you directly”?

Besides, I’m fine with the referenced user getting a notification of being quoted - but that’s a different concept than a reply.

> [@codinghorror](#):
>
> (also if you really didn’t want to reply to them, use the plain \> quote, not a structured expandable quote.)

Except maybe I’d want everything that comes with a structured expandable quote (link to post, unrolling, etc.).

> [@codinghorror](#):
>
> If a discussion veers off wildly, to the point that others participating in the topic would object to the very presence of their posts in that topic as defined by the topic title and the first post – it means that conversation should be in a different topic.

So your idea of discussion is that everybody replies directly to the topic, and doesn’t engage in topical discussion with any other commenter? _That’s a comment system, not a discussion system_.

For example, let’s say the topic is “Opinions on Discourse”. I voice an opinion, someone disagrees with me, I disagree with them, and what then? Do we split off a “Opinions on Discourse - an argument between @Maciejasjmj and @someuser” thread? Should everybody do that whenever they engage in a conversation with another commenter? Or do we lock up the whole thread for other users?

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/ability-to-unroll-context-when-in-reply-to-indicator-is-suppressed/18166)._