Smiley

[Subhajit Mitra]

can we have some more smilies(emoticon)? pleaseeee

[Ernest Friedman-Hill]

No, but we're considering having fewer...

[Ulf Dittmer]

You can have as many as you want to; check out this page.

[Svend Rost]

Originally posted by Ernest Friedman-Hill:
No, but we're considering having fewer...

Good idea,

or have a maximum of smilies per post



/Svend Rost

[Jim Yingst]

There is an upper limit to the number of smilies. I think it's twenty or so. It's actually been raised a bit since the earliest days. Now I'm thinking that what we really need is a limit to the number of consecutive smilies. :roll:
[ June 07, 2006: Message edited by: Jim Yingst ]

[Subhajit Mitra]

You can have as many as you want to; check out this page.

these smilies are great!!!

thankx

[Dave Lenton]

A well place emoticon can help clarify things, for example a can change a rude looking comment into the tongue-in-cheek joke it was intended to be. Also using can possibly avoid people writing annoying things like "ROFLMAO".

On the other hand, more and more posts have a kind of emoticon pollution, where it becomes hard to concentrate on the text because of all the movement and colours around it. A limit on consecutive emoticons would be great.


Of course a post full of jumping, grinning, clapping blobs is about as close to meaningless drivel as you can get.

[Ulf Dittmer]

Originally posted by Subhajit Mitra:


these smilies are great!!!

thankx

Uh oh. I think I just made enemies with Jim and Ernest.

[Ernest Friedman-Hill]

I like the way Dave Lenton explained it.

I don't understand what a dancing banana is supposed to convey, nor can I see why a little blue man running around a "Thank you!" sign is better than just saying "Thank you!" I think the purpose of emoticons is to clarify and disambiguate the text, not to decorate the page.

As it is, cultural differences in interpretation of our existing emoticon set is already a problem, especially this one: :roll: . I have no idea what many people think this means.

[Paul Sturrock]

Of course a post full of jumping, grinning, clapping blobs is about as close to meaningless drivel as you can get.

Should we start requiring them in every MD post then? Try starting some discussion along the lines of "why religion X is better than Y" when you know you must work at least three dancing bananas into your argument.


Oh, and I suppose I should say

[Angela Poynton]

Ah the temptation to revisit the old days and produce some smilies art is strong ... I must resist!

[Dave Lenton]

Originally posted by Paul Sturrock:

Should we start requiring them in every MD post then? Try starting some discussion along the lines of "why religion X is better than Y" when you know you must work at least three dancing bananas into your argument.

It could work a bit like karma. Every meaningful sentence (bad karma) could be countered with some emoticons(good karma):

I hate Vice-Deputy-Head-Representative Bob. He obviously said something bad about a camel so that he could steal vegetable oil from it. Oh, and Thor is the best god because of his funky hammer. :roll: Bob is also evil because he puts his brackets on the same line as the method declaration.

Argh! My eyes!
[ June 08, 2006: Message edited by: Dave Lenton ]

[Pradeep bhatt]

As it is, cultural differences in interpretation of our existing emoticon set is already a problem, especially this one :roll: . I have no idea what many people think this means.

What does it mean

[Ernest Friedman-Hill]

Originally posted by Pradip Bhat:


What does it mean

Sarcasm. It usually means that your true meaning is the opposite of whatever you just said. So, for example

"I have to go to the dentist today, and I always enjoy that :roll: "

Too often, I see people use it like this:

"Please help me!!! :roll: "

And I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean. I've even seen

"Thank you!!! :roll: "

Which looks like the poster means to say they're not thankful at all.

[Pradeep bhatt]

Thanks. I had a different understanding of :roll:

[Ulf Dittmer]

I certainly wouldn't have thought that :roll: represents sarcasm. While eyerolling can indicate that, I think it's much more common to indicate the non-verbal equivalent of "Sheesh" or "Duh".

Another sign of cross-cultural differences, and possibly another sign that we should limit the selection of emoticons to the most obvious ones.

[Bear Bibeault]

Originally posted by Ulf Dittmer:
possibly another sign that we should limit the selection of emoticons to the most obvious ones.

The empty set?

[Jim Yingst]

[Ulf]: I certainly wouldn't have thought that represents sarcasm. While eyerolling can indicate that, I think it's much more common to indicate the non-verbal equivalent of "Sheesh" or "Duh".

That's probably a better description, though it can indicate all of these, and there's a fair amount of overlap. It certainly doesn't work with "Please help me! :roll: " or "Thank you! :roll: "

[Subhajit Mitra]

[Ulf]: I certainly wouldn't have thought that represents sarcasm.

i think we must have a guideline for the use of smilies, specially for those which has dual meaning. some more smilies are defiantly needed of same type like one with sad confused and one with happy confused this way expressions will be more clear.

, hope this one doesn't have any other meaning

[Campbell Ritchie]

As for the rollin geyes upward graemlin, has anybody ever seen a way of typing that smilie, in a similar style to :-) for ? I have tried to find one and never succeeded.

CR

[Ryan McGuire]

Originally posted by Jim Yingst:

That's probably a better description, though it can indicate all of these, and there's a fair amount of overlap. It certainly doesn't work with "Please help me! :roll: " or "Thank you! :roll: "

I've seen :roll: used to mean both, "I can't believe you're so dumb," and, "I can't believe I was so dumb," at different times.

Of course, the problem is that it's not always easy to tell which is meant when. :roll:
[ June 13, 2006: Message edited by: Ryan McGuire ]

[Ulf Dittmer]

Ryan, that's an excellent summary of how it is used. Given that an emoticon should disambiguate a post, that's a strong point for getting rid of it.

[David O'Meara]

But it's the only one I use :roll:

[Shaan Shar]

Ooops a trial only..