I disagree. Emojis are being used more and more in everyday communication, whether people like it or not. Removing the ability to use emojis in titles or elsewhere will just complicate things for...
I disagree. Emojis are being used more and more in everyday communication, whether people like it or not. Removing the ability to use emojis in titles or elsewhere will just complicate things for no real gain. - unnecessary emojis in titles can easily be edited away by a few people anyways.
I've only seen them used substantially use for chats, reactions on chats, and low-effort or attention-seeking posts. There's nothing they accomplish more than their previous-gen *shrug* or :-) do,...
I've only seen them used substantially use for chats, reactions on chats, and low-effort or attention-seeking posts. There's nothing they accomplish more than their previous-gen *shrug* or :-) do, except being eyecatching.
It's not hard to strip emojis, they're a subset of unicode.
https://www.wired.com/story/eye-mouth-eye/ so if we would take the title of this post 'The 👁👄👁 Debacle Sums Up Tech’s Race Issues' yes, we could remove the emojis or replace this with "eye mouth...
so if we would take the title of this post
'The 👁👄👁 Debacle Sums Up Tech’s Race Issues'
yes, we could remove the emojis or replace this with "eye mouth eye" - but it will still lose a ton of its meaning. I am sure this will become more prevalent in the future. Again, I think removing emojis from titles serves no real purpose. If they're not necessary they can be edited away, and if they are part of the story, why remove them?
A number of languages are also used in everyday communication, yet if I recall correctly, Tildes only encourages communication in English. It would be depressing to see emojis encouraged yet most...
Emojis are being used more and more in everyday communication, whether people like it or not.
A number of languages are also used in everyday communication, yet if I recall correctly, Tildes only allows encourages communication in English. It would be depressing to see emojis encouraged yet most of the world's languages prohibited discouraged (thanks to cfabbro for finding the source I remembered but couldn't find).
Yeah, AFAIK there is no prohibition against using other languages on the site, although there is a caveat: https://docs.tildes.net/philosophy/site-design#tildes-and-non-english-languages
Yeah, AFAIK there is no prohibition against using other languages on the site, although there is a caveat:
For now, Tildes supports only one language: English. Many of the site's goals will be difficult or impossible to work towards without being able to understand what's going on in a community, so for now everything needs to be primarily in English. This may change someday in the future, and if it does, the hierarchical groups could work very well for giving other languages their own set of groups.
I find this a false equivalence. Emojis are being used in English language. The website is in English. If I post a german article, 90% of the users can't understand it. If I post an article about...
I find this a false equivalence. Emojis are being used in English language. The website is in English. If I post a german article, 90% of the users can't understand it. If I post an article about 👁👄👁 - we can still discuss it
Not to be curt, but emojis have no place on a site geared for discussion. Words are infinitely better when character limit isn't a problem. Otherwise we'd likely still be using hyroglyphics....
Not to be curt, but emojis have no place on a site geared for discussion.
Words are infinitely better when character limit isn't a problem. Otherwise we'd likely still be using hyroglyphics.
Besides, as an old fart, I resent the destruction of ascii art in favor of in-line pictures. :-)
Do keep in mind that maybe we occasionally need emojis in titles, e.g. if a original title uses them or if we discuss emojis. Use-mention distinction and all that. I can see though that generally,...
Do keep in mind that maybe we occasionally need emojis in titles, e.g. if a original title uses them or if we discuss emojis. Use-mention distinction and all that. I can see though that generally, use of emojis in titles is frowned upon.
That seems kinda ridiculous. Surely we can judge articles on their merits rather than something as simplistic and snobby as "has emoji, therefore bad".
That seems kinda ridiculous. Surely we can judge articles on their merits rather than something as simplistic and snobby as "has emoji, therefore bad".
Agreed, and IMO this issue falls squarely under Tildes' "Trust people, but punish abusers" philosophy. Emojis need not be banned from titles, since if/when someone abuses them we can just edit the...
Agreed, and IMO this issue falls squarely under Tildes' "Trust people, but punish abusers" philosophy. Emojis need not be banned from titles, since if/when someone abuses them we can just edit the title to make it more appropriate. This isn't like reddit where titles are permanent.
The 👁👄👁 Debacle Sums Up Tech’s Race Issues is another emojified example. I'm sure there'll be tons of other websites to come, maybe even companies that use an emoji as part of their name?
The 👁👄👁 Debacle Sums Up Tech’s Race Issues is another emojified example. I'm sure there'll be tons of other websites to come, maybe even companies that use an emoji as part of their name?
Which can be just as easily be titled "The Emoji Debacle Sums Up Tech's Race Issues" and get the same point across. A single example of an article with emojis in the title that isn't utter crap...
Which can be just as easily be titled "The Emoji Debacle Sums Up Tech's Race Issues" and get the same point across. A single example of an article with emojis in the title that isn't utter crap doesn't disprove my statement, just shows there are exceptions to the "unlikely to be suitable..." statement I made.
What you may see as "utter crap" and unsuitable for Tildes, another person may see as charming and lighthearted (something this site could frankly use a lot more of, IMO). Not everything needs to...
What you may see as "utter crap" and unsuitable for Tildes, another person may see as charming and lighthearted (something this site could frankly use a lot more of, IMO). Not everything needs to be completely sterile and academic here. And while I am against meme submissions, there is a middle ground between those two extremes. Emojis in the occasional title isn't going to destroy the site, so long as they're used sparingly and when appropriate.
Yeah, it can definitely be annoying, but I think it ultimately comes from a good place. People seem to truly care about the site, how it functions, keeping the general level of discourse and...
Yeah, it can definitely be annoying, but I think it ultimately comes from a good place. People seem to truly care about the site, how it functions, keeping the general level of discourse and standards here higher than they are on most of reddit, etc. Some people just take that a bit too far sometimes, and lose perspective, IMO. So I wouldn't take it too personally.
Sure, we can. However, in the grand scheme emojis provide little more than clickbait and are no better than "This industry hates these five tricks!" titles.
Sure, we can. However, in the grand scheme emojis provide little more than clickbait and are no better than "This industry hates these five tricks!" titles.
I think there's a general sentiment on the internet (and likewise, Tildes) that emojis are overused, attention-grabbing and distracting, and not very useful or expressive when compared to plain text.
I think there's a general sentiment on the internet (and likewise, Tildes) that emojis are overused, attention-grabbing and distracting, and not very useful or expressive when compared to plain text.
Agreed. It's also a waste using them for silly stuff. That eye-catching property we discard so casually because it's distracting and overused everywhere else can be used to great effect on a site...
Agreed. It's also a waste using them for silly stuff. That eye-catching property we discard so casually because it's distracting and overused everywhere else can be used to great effect on a site like this one. Let's not waste it on silly emojis. Better to use eye-catching icons and other image elements only to highlight things that are actually important. For example, active AMAs would get a hell of a lot more attention if they had a colored bit of some kind to draw eyes to them in the listings.
We should be mindful of the power of those silly little colored bits and put them to better use.
Not OP, but I get it. Emojis are like advertisements. When placed besides B&W text, coloured emojis are loud and distracting. Even B&W emojis, due to higher density and unusual curves steal...
Not OP, but I get it.
Emojis are like advertisements. When placed besides B&W text, coloured emojis are loud and distracting. Even B&W emojis, due to higher density and unusual curves steal attention.
On a website promoting thoughtful discussions, emojis serve little purpose other than providing a limited lowedt-common-denominator set of responses that are mostly non contributing.
I would prefer emojis be banned from all discussions, but they have their place in lighthearted conversations. But removing them from titles would be a decent middle ground.
Tildes could use a bit of css to make emojis gray-scale. Would allow them to be used when appropriate without making them "pop" and be too attention grabbing.
Tildes could use a bit of css to make emojis gray-scale. Would allow them to be used when appropriate without making them "pop" and be too attention grabbing.
That is an interesting idea, but is it actually possible? I thought emojis were rendered by the browser, so couldn't be changed in that way. Edit: Nevermind... looks like adding some CSS, filter:...
That is an interesting idea, but is it actually possible? I thought emojis were rendered by the browser, so couldn't be changed in that way.
If there's a good reason why ZWJs are stripped, it's probably better to just ban emojis and be done with it rather than coming up with a potentially difficult-to-maintain workaround. It's not like...
If there's a good reason why ZWJs are stripped, it's probably better to just ban emojis and be done with it rather than coming up with a potentially difficult-to-maintain workaround. It's not like we have oodles of posts with emojis in their titles anyway.
As a solution, I suggest we strip all emojis from titles. That will solve this and all future problems. :)
I disagree. Emojis are being used more and more in everyday communication, whether people like it or not. Removing the ability to use emojis in titles or elsewhere will just complicate things for no real gain. - unnecessary emojis in titles can easily be edited away by a few people anyways.
I've only seen them used substantially use for chats, reactions on chats, and low-effort or attention-seeking posts. There's nothing they accomplish more than their previous-gen
*shrug*or:-)do, except being eyecatching.It's not hard to strip emojis, they're a subset of unicode.
https://www.wired.com/story/eye-mouth-eye/
so if we would take the title of this post
'The 👁👄👁 Debacle Sums Up Tech’s Race Issues'
yes, we could remove the emojis or replace this with "eye mouth eye" - but it will still lose a ton of its meaning. I am sure this will become more prevalent in the future. Again, I think removing emojis from titles serves no real purpose. If they're not necessary they can be edited away, and if they are part of the story, why remove them?
A number of languages are also used in everyday communication, yet if I recall correctly, Tildes only
allowsencourages communication in English. It would be depressing to see emojis encouraged yet most of the world's languagesprohibiteddiscouraged (thanks to cfabbro for finding the source I remembered but couldn't find).Tildes allows articles to be posted in other languages. Even comments.
Yeah, AFAIK there is no prohibition against using other languages on the site, although there is a caveat:
https://docs.tildes.net/philosophy/site-design#tildes-and-non-english-languages
I find this a false equivalence. Emojis are being used in English language. The website is in English. If I post a german article, 90% of the users can't understand it. If I post an article about 👁👄👁 - we can still discuss it
And some users can't understand emojis. Sometimes they don't work and sometimes they're disabled.
Not to be curt, but emojis have no place on a site geared for discussion.
Words are infinitely better when character limit isn't a problem. Otherwise we'd likely still be using hyroglyphics.
Besides, as an old fart, I resent the destruction of ascii art in favor of in-line pictures. :-)
Do keep in mind that maybe we occasionally need emojis in titles, e.g. if a original title uses them or if we discuss emojis. Use-mention distinction and all that. I can see though that generally, use of emojis in titles is frowned upon.
I'd go so far to say that if the original article title uses emojis it's unlikely to be suitable "on a site geared for discussion."
That seems kinda ridiculous. Surely we can judge articles on their merits rather than something as simplistic and snobby as "has emoji, therefore bad".
Agreed, and IMO this issue falls squarely under Tildes' "Trust people, but punish abusers" philosophy. Emojis need not be banned from titles, since if/when someone abuses them we can just edit the title to make it more appropriate. This isn't like reddit where titles are permanent.
And while not emojis, I can point to at least three instances (all Tom Scott videos) where other bits of Unicode were perfectly appropriate in the title, on a submission fit for Tildes:
Ə: The most common vowel sound in English
ᑖᒻ ᔅᑳᑦ and ᖃᓂᐅᔮᖅᐸᐃᑦ
᚛ᚈᚑᚋ ᚄᚉᚑᚈᚈ᚜ and ᚛ᚑᚌᚐᚋ᚜
But I'm sure there are more, and even cases where emojis would be perfectly appropriate too.
The 👁👄👁 Debacle Sums Up Tech’s Race Issues is another emojified example. I'm sure there'll be tons of other websites to come, maybe even companies that use an emoji as part of their name?
Which can be just as easily be titled "The Emoji Debacle Sums Up Tech's Race Issues" and get the same point across. A single example of an article with emojis in the title that isn't utter crap doesn't disprove my statement, just shows there are exceptions to the "unlikely to be suitable..." statement I made.
What you may see as "utter crap" and unsuitable for Tildes, another person may see as charming and lighthearted (something this site could frankly use a lot more of, IMO). Not everything needs to be completely sterile and academic here. And while I am against meme submissions, there is a middle ground between those two extremes. Emojis in the occasional title isn't going to destroy the site, so long as they're used sparingly and when appropriate.
Yeah, it can definitely be annoying, but I think it ultimately comes from a good place. People seem to truly care about the site, how it functions, keeping the general level of discourse and standards here higher than they are on most of reddit, etc. Some people just take that a bit too far sometimes, and lose perspective, IMO. So I wouldn't take it too personally.
Are there enough topics on Tildes with emoji in the title to have anything resembling a reasonable sample size?
Sure, we can. However, in the grand scheme emojis provide little more than clickbait and are no better than "This industry hates these five tricks!" titles.
I think there's a general sentiment on the internet (and likewise, Tildes) that emojis are overused, attention-grabbing and distracting, and not very useful or expressive when compared to plain text.
Agreed. It's also a waste using them for silly stuff. That eye-catching property we discard so casually because it's distracting and overused everywhere else can be used to great effect on a site like this one. Let's not waste it on silly emojis. Better to use eye-catching icons and other image elements only to highlight things that are actually important. For example, active AMAs would get a hell of a lot more attention if they had a colored bit of some kind to draw eyes to them in the listings.
We should be mindful of the power of those silly little colored bits and put them to better use.
Not OP, but I get it.
Emojis are like advertisements. When placed besides B&W text, coloured emojis are loud and distracting. Even B&W emojis, due to higher density and unusual curves steal attention.
On a website promoting thoughtful discussions, emojis serve little purpose other than providing a limited lowedt-common-denominator set of responses that are mostly non contributing.
I would prefer emojis be banned from all discussions, but they have their place in lighthearted conversations. But removing them from titles would be a decent middle ground.
Tildes could use a bit of css to make emojis gray-scale. Would allow them to be used when appropriate without making them "pop" and be too attention grabbing.
That is an interesting idea, but is it actually possible? I thought emojis were rendered by the browser, so couldn't be changed in that way.
Edit: Nevermind... looks like adding some CSS,
filter: grayscale(100%), works on emojis. Added to gitlab: https://gitlab.com/tildes/tildes/-/issues/725If there's a good reason why ZWJs are stripped, it's probably better to just ban emojis and be done with it rather than coming up with a potentially difficult-to-maintain workaround. It's not like we have oodles of posts with emojis in their titles anyway.
I wonder how hard it would be to create a form allowing a single emoji? I can think of a few places where it might be useful.
This thread is just devolving into pointless bickering now. Thanks for the bug report.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Added to gitlab:
https://gitlab.com/tildes/tildes/-/issues/724
As a counter to the most highly upvoted thread in here: 😠😞😥😭🥺