Rationing of smilies

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sligoman

Not sensitive about it, just you said, "You dont deserve them, you just abuse the smilies"

In my eyes you=the person you quoted which was me, sligoman;) :p

---

It was mean you as in you plural ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maz

It was mean you as in you plural ;)

---

You could have just said "ye":p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sligoman

You could have just said "ye":p

---

You (single) are right but I preferred at that moment in time to use you (plural)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maz

You (single) are right but I preferred at that moment in time to use you (plural)

---

Ok then, if that's what you (single) wanted then that's fine with me (sligoman) :D :D

Bet Peadar had a hand in this smilie protest ;)

I like the smilies but i'm learning to control them! :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sligoman

You could have just said "ye"

---

Go after her, sligoman..don't let her get away with it...;)

In Anto's post previously that Maz was on about:rolleyes: :p , there was a need for 3.

One anger to show the potential point of the sentence. The wink to show he doesn't mean it or it doesn't bother him as muich as the anger smiley would suggest and the laughing to indicate the funniness of the situation etc..


Ah, it's too early to be working things like that out.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d f x-

In Anto's post previously that Maz was on about,there was a need for 3.

One anger to show the potential point of the sentence. The wink to show he doesn't mean it or it doesn't bother him as muich as the anger smiley would suggest and the laughing to indicate the funniness of the situation etc

---

Exactly,Good man DFX........are you really a Shams fan,you seem smarter than the average Sham :eek: :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anto McC

Exactly,Good man DFX........are you really a Shams fan,you seem smarter than the average Sham

---

Hehe, nice to see yer giving them their real name now that we're back up:cool::D:p

Than the average what?:rolleyes: :p

Nice one for limiting smilies adam, they wreck my head...

especially when someone replies to a post with justsmilies... now that's irritating

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ruairi

Nice one for limiting smilies adam, they wreck my head...

especially when someone replies to a post with justsmilies... now that's irritating

---

;) ;) ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tiktok

;) ;) ;)

---

now that's what grinds my gears.. lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ruairi

Nice one for limiting smilies adam, they wreck my head...

especially when someone replies to a post with justsmilies... now that's irritating

---

That's why I did it. d f x- has a valid point, but I'm inclined to believe that even if people commit to cutting down on it, they'll just start again, and newbies will come along and do it anyway. Plus of course there's nothing stopping people using alternatives, which are far less distracting. ;););) ;-)

Let me put it this way: If I had my way, there'd be no avatars, no smilies, and handles, thread titles and posts would be censored way more than they currently are. I think this kind of stuff is a relatively happy medium.

adam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ruairi

especially when someone replies to a post with justsmilies... now that's irritating

---

A smilie makes the point better than a long, verbose piece of prose that you seem to prefer.

We don't in 'real' life always comment, there is such a thing called 'quiet' emotion if you will...i.e. looks could kill. You don't have to say anything, but just having a ssad face or and angry face puts across the emotion and point better than a long winded pointless explanantion.

Now I could put down two or three paragraphs to indicate that really it doesn't bother me, but that I am merely arguing the point, seeing another side of the story. Or I could just use this:

:cool:

Simple. You don't need three pages when one paragraph will suffice. Smilies shorten and clarify issues and bring them to the point. That's why they're worth further inclusion, imho.

Think the quick reply thing cuts down on my use of them. Only use the ones I can type now (unless I HAVE to use the rolling eyes one..)

I'm with Ruairi on this one.

Jeez, what did the world of sarcasm do before smilies?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahamsta

Let me put it this way: If I had my way, there'd be no avatars, no smilies, and handles, thread titles and posts would be censored way more than they currently are.

---

Ah come on, how else are we supposed to know who to have an irrational prejudice against?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahamsta

Let me put it this way: If I had my way, there'd be no avatars, no smilies, and handles, thread titles and posts would be censored way more than they currently are.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr.Nightdub

Ah come on, how else are we supposed to know who to have an irrational prejudice against?

---

I have some sympathy with Dr.N's position.

====

If we're going to have rules like this, can we put in some sort of spell check system?? Many foot.ie users have little or no skill at written grammar.

At the very least, can we ban "text speak"

plz?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr.Nightdub

Ah come on, how else are we supposed to know who to have an irrational prejudice against?

---

Random number picker?

Quote:

---

can we put in some sort of spell check system?

---

We actually did for a while, or rather I did when I was running betas. Unfortunately the spellcheck crowd told the vBulletin crowd that they were no longer running the free service, so it was removed from the full 3.5 release. If it comes back, I'll definitely enable it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

At the very least, can we ban "text speak"

---

You know very well I dislike it, which is the same as saying it's banned. If you see it, deal with it or report it.

adam