3 ms·
this is a rather simple case that just tickles the internet and HN interest due to the novelty of an emoji. the real focus should be on the despicable behavior
by jiveturkey 3y ago
this is a rather simple case that just tickles the internet and HN interest due to the novelty of an emoji. the real focus should be on the despicable behavior of the defendant for trying to renege on an expensive contract. it’s everyday stuff.
what i find most interesting is that the official court documents, which as we are familiar with are in a typewriter-like ascii plus some typographical symbols (like the section marker), contain the emoji in question. i appreciate the least common denominator format for official government documents. i find it quite something that they have reproduced the actual emoji symbol rather than restricting themselves to a description.
whereas even HN does not accept emoji in comments.
- lolinder 3y ago> whereas even HN does not accept emoji in comments. This isn't due to a technical barrier, it's an aesthetic decision. dang has at least once edited a submission title to include an emoji, and I'd assume comments could just as easily include them, it's just not in line with HN's style.