79 replies to this topic

[Bart]

DLotS and I were wondering what people generally think of the "" smiley.

1. DLotS looks at it this way. "Cows are animals too" = neutral, "Cows are animals too " = "omg idiot don't you know?"
2. I think "Cows are animals too" = "sigh i shouldn't have to tell you that", "Cows are animals too " = "just for your information"

Which do you think?

[Phil]

Obviously it depends on the situation but if you use it a lot, it seems rather patronising. That's why I hardly ever use it.

[MT]

Agree mainly with DLotS. A few times it's alright, but if you use it a lot it does tend to radiate a feeling of arrogance

[Pasidon]

...
I can't make much sense out your argument, 2-G. Something about... PETA? Cows?

If you guys are worried about arrogance, you have more than a smiley to be worried about.

[Elvenlord]

Seems kinda "I told you so, moron"
Seems more "Kidding"

[Taralom]

Quote wikipedia

A wink is a facial expression made by briefly closing one eye. A wink is an informal mode of communication usually signaling, depending on context, sexual attraction or shared hidden knowledge or intent.

Therefor, I say that it is:
I'm sending you a signal showing my sexual attraction


Man, that would be a total enlightenment in the forums

[Allathar]

I pick option 3:

3. "Cows are animals too" = neutral, "Cows are animals too " = "just for your information".

[Romanul]

I'm with Bart.

[Mathijs]

Who cares. Smilies are annoying.

[olli]

Indeed. Use them sparingly. 2play, you have an annoying habit of using it far too often with it seeming like you are being patronising...when you hopefully aren't. This particular smiley just radiates arrogance. Compare it to the "cheeky" one on MSN perhaps and you'll see what I mean.

Just try not to use them, it make post look stoopid and like u r a child

[Mathijs]

The only reason they might seem patronizing is because people always have trouble accepting correction by their peers and instead of realizing they themselves are just conceited, they accuse the corrector of being patronizing. How dare he.

Edited by Matias, 28 January 2010 - 02:20 PM.

[Phil]

Now that was patronising

[olli]

The only reason they might seem patronizing is because people always have trouble accepting correction by their peers and instead of realizing they themselves are just conceited, they accuse the corrector of being patronizing. How dare he.

I'm saying it from a subjective point of view of what I have seen around the forums. I'm not saying I have been victim to it.

[Mathijs]

I wasn't refering to your post in particular.

[olli]

Fair enough.

On a side note, I think people should have a limit on how many "emoticons" they can use per week. 2 a week at max. Seeing a post littered with them looses all credibility and I don't even bother reading it because it's most likely full of shit.

and are the only ones that should be used!

[Vortigern]

Who cares. Smilies are annoying.

There are perhaps three emoticons I will use. They convey my full range of emotions: contented, sarcastic, flirtatious. Wait, four: despairing.


Huh, what do you know? I use the same face for half of my potential emotions. I guess we really do only need these three. You can dissemble all the others into their component binary molecules.

[Beowulf]

Here's a thought. Who the fuck cares? Where is that option?

[Mathijs]

Top right of your screen, a tiny little X.

[olli]

Made me lol.

Control + W works just as good.

[Archon]

I'm sending you a signal showing my sexual attraction

* to everyone*