rich wrote
I’ve always thought that emoji were a smiling pile of shit, and now we have proof in the right-hand column.
Should emojis be an opt-in or an opt-out feature?
If the majority says no they should be opt-in for sure 
I doubt a well made pull will be objected to if the majority choice for optness is respected.
@jasonrobinson So basically the ideal setup would be like in the screenshot @rich1 shared, but with “None” set as default.
The Diaspora Forums use the Discourse software, doesn’t it? Could someone explain me how they legally use the Apple/International emoji images without getting sued for copyright infringement?
@ravenbird your reason is probably not a very good one. The question of this decision is not, if other parts of diaspora are any more or less important, but if this particular feature is wanted or not.
Oh shit… I think I broke the statu quo 
How about we ask designers within the Diaspora community to design an emoji set that fits in well with the UI, which could then be packaged in a sprite.
Is the outcome fair?
I guess an opt-in is a fair solution and outcome.
Is the outcome fair?
Well, it’s opposite to the result of the vote, which was majority against replacing unicode characters with images. So no, I’d say it’s not fair.
I’d say it’s fair, even though strictly it’s not what the vote was about. So if someone (@goob?) wants to challenge the outcome then just create a proposal about including an opt-in emoji lib. I’ll at least vote for it. But of course the technical solution must be acceptable - voting for something doesn’t mean anything will be accepted 
Well, it’s opposite to the result of the vote, which was majority against replacing unicode characters with images. So no, I’d say it’s not fair.
It’s pretty straightforward: since coming up with an opt-in solution is generally agreed upon, it really doesn’t matter that some people disagreed.
On a different note, interestingly enough, the last four ones who disagreed did it at the same time, short before the proposal was closed. Conspiracy theory?
It’s pretty straightforward: since coming up with an opt-in solution is generally agreed upon, it really doesn’t matter that some people disagreed.
No, opt-in solutions should also be weighed upon. And this vote clearly had lots of comments on people not wanting even opt-in emojis.
It is not the opposite of the result of the vote, since it is not the proposal. The proposal was to change characters with graphics. The outcome says something about an opt-in solution. And I don’t think that an opt-in solution would even be worth any proposal since it is simple a bonus feature which shouldn’t bother anyone who does not want that.
And I don’t think that an opt-in solution would even be worth any proposal since it is simple a bonus feature which shouldn’t bother anyone who does not want that.
+1 - that’s exactly what I meant to say, but I didn’t have the right words maybe.
If someone wanted to merge in an opt-in email client or an opt-in pacman game - yes it would need to be decided upon, and if anyone objects to an opt-in emoji lib, yes that should be decided upon as well
I’d be surprised if it wouldn’t pass so it’s not a big deal for emoji supporters I’d vote for it at least even though I’d rather be put in hell than activate emojis.
If someone wanted to merge in an opt-in email client or an opt-in pacman game - yes it would need to be decided upon, and if anyone objects to an opt-in emoji lib, yes that should be decided upon as well
You’re right about decision making, but I did that with improving the look and feel of podupti.me here and it was somehow useless, because obviously most of the people agreed upon, so :
I’d be surprised if it wouldn’t pass so it’s not a big deal for emoji supporters
then there’s not much of a need to vote for something that will evidently pass.
I’d vote for it at least even though I’d rather be put in hell than activate emojis.
Well, thank you, at least you care about others’ preferences, that’s (evidently) a good thing.
I think it depends on the kind of opt-in whether this is acceptable or not.
If you as podmin can adjust a parameter (or checkout an additional git to a folder) to include the emoji-lib-thingy and it is off by default, that is … okay.
If it is off, it should not impact any speed or something of the server.
It is not the opposite of the result of the vote, since it is not the proposal. The proposal was to change characters with graphics.
Exactly; and the vote was (as far as I can tell) not to replace characters with images, which is what the outcome says should happen. Therefore it’s opposite to the result of the vote.
Opt-in is an entirely separate matter, as it wasn’t part of the proposal.
(I bet GP is enjoying this…)
@goob Please make a proposal about opt-in image replacement if you disagree with my outcome.
The majority “no” was too weak and the “yes” too strong to abandon the image library feature altogether. My outcome reflected this. If 60% or more of voters had said “no”, then it would have been clearer to decide. However, right now the opt-in feature is a way to be fair with the 48% who actually want image emojis to be available on Diaspora, while not affecting the opponents.
48% is significant. Almost as much as 52%.
The majority “no” was too weak and the “yes” too strong to abandon the image library feature altogether.
That’s not the question. I broke the statu quo to agree an opt-in feature. Not a full agreement. And I was not alone…