5 ms·
I like the idea of adding more expressiveness, pictorially capturing sometimes fleeting moments of emotion or accurately representing an emotional state that ca
by dpflan 11y ago
I like the idea of adding more expressiveness, pictorially capturing sometimes fleeting moments of emotion or accurately representing an emotional state that can occur.
These are the following reactions:
1. +1
2. -1
3. smile
4. thinking_face
5. heart
6. tada
Do they capture the necessary expressiveness for the context? Facebook's reactions cover more emotions, but FB is trying to support reaction to anything that can be posted.
- monsk 11y agoAll I want is slack's :partyparrot: and I'm satisfied.
- laughinghan 11y agoYou may be interested to know that :partyparrot: is not built-into Slack, someone on your team had to add it: http://cultofthepartyparrot.com/ http://cultofthepartyparrot.com/ ...which I just did to my team's Slack.
- mayank 11y agoConsidering that it's Github, how about things relevant to software engineering, like: agree, disagree, support, insightful, obsolete, misleading. I can't imagine it being helpful to know that someone felt "heart" about an issue comment.
- xentronium 11y agoHeart is probably a supersized +1 for pull requests and a nod to Aaron Peterson.
- dfc 11y agowho is aaron peterson? Googling that name results in a photographer,a lawyer and a bunch of doctors.
- robszumski 11y agothis was my initial reaction is well. It seems like this will just add to the noise and not help large open source projects get work done.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- minimaxir 11y agoI recently wrote a post about Facebook Reactions and if it would be effective at helping quantify sentiment. (http://minimaxir.com/2016/02/facebook-reactions/ http://minimaxir.com/2016/02/facebook-reactions/) The tl;dr is that I believe that Reactions are redundant outside of positive/negative classification. GitHub actually has both +1 and -1, which satisfies me. But there's not much productive purpose with a smile/heart/tada other than to be quirky. (The thinking_face is neutral and adds nothing in this aspect)
- dpflan 11y agoYeah, as I asked below: Will this be a meaningful form of communication and is the language (subset of images) sufficient? Can small changes like this perhaps change how PRs, Comments, etc are treated? Will it be productive, a distraction, or a NOOP?
- danvayn 11y agoEh...what's the point?
- dpflan 11y agoI think the point is: Will this be a meaningful form of communication and is the language (subset of images) sufficient? Can small changes like this perhaps change how PRs, Comments, etc are treated? Will it be productive, a distraction, or a NOOP? Would you use this feature or have you used a feature like this?
- z1mm32m4n 11y agoI was a little surprised that neither :ship: nor :shipit: made the list; it seems like these frequently show up in discussions as well.
- dpflan 11y agoRight, more domain-specific options would make sense.
- fineline 11y agoFour positive, one neutral, one negative. Balanced? Where is the sadface to go with smile? The warface to go with heart? Or the facepalm to go with party?
- TranquilMarmot 11y agoI don't understand why they limited it to six responses rather than just letting you search for one and use it (the same way slack does)?
- brbcoding 11y agoI actually don't have :thinking_face: but have :confused: instead.
- qwyxzy 11y agoI think GitHub wanted an option to express "I don't understand this," and decided :confused: was a better fit. Which makes sense, because :thinking_face: could mean "I'm considering this" or "Interesting point," which is not, I think, what that option is meant to convey.