this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
208 points (78.4% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
555 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I have nothing against moderate emoji use that accompanies coherent text, but I disagree that texting is a poor medium for communication. We've been effectively writing for thousands of years. It's a skill that can be difficult for some people, and can take practice to become good at, but that doesn't make it a bad medium.
But live/real time text communication with relatively informal conversations is new.
Going back 100 years, if you were writing text to have a conversation you were likely sending a letter, this asynchronous communication method means that you were putting more time and effort into each message as it was a lot of effort to get the message to another person (even if that is just hand delivering it to your neighbor)
You also weren't expecting immediate responses. The expectation is that a decent amount of time is going to pass before the next phase of the conversation.
Instant messaging is basically brand new as far as the history of written language goes. So with it comes new paradigms in discussion.
Emojis offer a great way to express emotions that succinctly convey a lot of information. Great for back and forth conversations.
Being able to react to a message with ๐ is awesome and really not much different from all of the other initialisms that have been developed on the Internet over the years.
Which is why I think emojis are fine. I just think traditional writing does not qualify as a poor medium.
I'll be honest, your argumentation is bad. As in "a 10 year old might argue better" bad.
Non sequitur, the conclusion doesn't follow from the presented evidence. Religious scriptures were purposefully written with ambiguity and the intent of tricking in mind, but even if they weren't, it doesn't follow that all text is unreliable because some text is unreliable.
So can words, or other types of pictograms.
That's your subjective perception, I hate most emojis.
Boomers are the most likely demographic to spam emojis, after little children.