Re: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Wed Jan 07 2009 - 22:26:55 CST

  • Next message: Erkki I. Kolehmainen: "RE: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy"

    I think what Rick was objecting to was the quoting of significant
    portions of a long post, if not all of it, followed by +1.

    It's important to keep the length of posts down, including quotational
    material, but it's also important to keep enough of the quote in place
    so people can tell what your +1 refers to. Finding that balance, and
    also sensing when the list needs or does not need another "I agree"
    post, is the key.

    Doug Ewell  *  Thornton, Colorado, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14  ˆ
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: "Phillips, Addison" <>
    To: <>; "'Michael Everson'" <>; "'unicode 
    Unicode Discussion'" <>
    Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2009 21:01
    Subject: RE: Emoji: emoticons vs. literacy
    >> This method of indicating approval/disapproval of a given statement
    >> is common in the IETF world, and it works.
    > +1
    > Er... uh... "yeah, like I totally agree with what Erkki just said, so 
    > count me as approving of his reasoning: I have nothing to add"
    > IETF chairs and moderators do remind people to cut down their replies. 
    > This is appropriate. Requiring people to write vast treatises of their 
    > own just to say that they agree with a superior argument is pedantry.
    > IMHO,
    > Addison
    > Addison Phillips
    > Globalization Architect -- Lab126
    > Internationalization is not a feature.
    > It is an architecture.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 07 2009 - 22:29:25 CST