> they're mostly harmless. I don't believe that, the confusion around the meaning of emojis are well established[0][1][2][3]. I strongly suspect that the conf

> they're mostly harmless. I don't believe that, the confusion around the meaning of emojis are well established[0][1][2][3]. I strongly suspect that the confusion and vagueness is even more predominant in professional communications than personal. Please consider that everyday the likelihood of someone reading your code who is from a different culture or context is even higher, somethings might seem obvious to us, but that is not necessarily objectively so. If you think I am making an argument for using plain and simple language and not just avoid emoji, you're right, that is the point. From a pure economic point of view, considering the arguably nonexistence value emojis provide, any risk or cost is too much. 0. https://www.businessinsider.com/science-reveals-the-most-confusing-emoji-2016-4/?r=AU&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/science-reveals-the-most-con... 1. http://fortune.com/2016/04/14/emoji-miscommunication-study-umn/ http://fortune.com/2016/04/14/emoji-miscommunication-study-u... 2. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3549376/Frustrated-triumphant-probably-sending-wrong-signals-using-12-commonly-misunderstood-emojis.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3549376/Frust... 3. https://www.mrporter.com/journal/modern-problems/the-most-confusing-emojis-explained/1986 https://www.mrporter.com/journal/modern-problems/the-most-co...