Mike Berger wrote:
Really?

Yes, really.

And if I have to read more than a few lines to figure
out what you wrote that's new, or if it requires scrolling to
find it, I just skip past the message.

But when quoted correctly (only necessary lines included, other
removed), there will be no more text to scroll than the text you _must_
read _before_ the new text, to know where is the new text replied to.
Then your argument isn't valid anymore. And the most annoying thing is
that I need to scroll down first to know where is the reply to, and
then scroll back to read the reply. Like in your message.

I can keep track of a
thread myself, but I don't need to reread the same messages
over and over and over and over and over again.

Yes, but including the quote below the reply doesn't make it more
interesting. And if the quote is after the actual message, it doesn't
mean that there isn't more of the new message below the quote, which is
below the first (and maybe the only) part of the new message. So you
must scroll down, however. And if you really think that the quote,
which you place below your message, is needless to read, why do you
include it at all?

And as I said already, a "full-quote", without any clipping, is very
annoying, independently to its place.