c hristian wrote:I do support emoticons, but if decide to use them, can we get find different ones to put on top than the choices that I now see over to my left? I think you need the British palate! This one is rather american , don't you think? The full smile, the half smile, the quarter smile, the chatter chatter one?
I quite like that set, though rarely use the straightforward smileys. The ones I mainly employ, sparingly, over on ours tend to be the shocked stare (left on second row - several people have cheekily suggested it's a self portrait!), the blush on the third row, the devilish grin, upwardly rolling eyes and knowing wink on the fourth row, and the lightbulb moment.
Having said that, we did have one former member so prone to smiley abuse - every post peppered with them like a plague rash - that I had to ask her to stop.
But back to Charlie's reservations: the thing they do is provide a momentary pause for thought. People skim read things on the web, don't take them in properly, bang out an ill-considered response instantly. A little sign which in effect says "just hang on a mo, I'm not that serious . . . " does seem to make a difference. You'll have to trust me on that one.
Ted wrote:Many of the members of this forum are music-obssessed men whose behaviour is often a bit weird - tending towards autistic.
Why does this remind me of a famous quote by the late folk agent Jean Oglesby (Davenport) that once appeared in the Melody Maker, where she praised folk clubs for saving the NHS millions on its mental health care budget by providing a weekly place for all the weird loners with no social skills to hang out? Now that started a flame war too, via old-fashioned letters. Nothing's new!