4 ms·
The change to the water gun was for ideological reasons. This is returning to the original. Without being the project manager, you're speculating on the amount
by theultdev 2y ago
The change to the water gun was for ideological reasons. This is returning to the original.
Without being the project manager, you're speculating on the amount of focus this had.
- yacine_ 2y ago[flagged]
- bastawhiz 2y agoIt's not a git revert. It is active effort to create a new emoji. There's zero cost to leaving it alone, there's material cost to changing it. Last time I checked, that's a bad way for a company that nearly went out of business to prioritize.
- theultdev 2y agoWell, I guess we'll just see how it pays off for them. It's already making buzz so if it was an hour of work, I'd say the marketing effect alone was worth it.
- bastawhiz 2y agoOh you're right, the pixels of an emoji are really going to be what reverses Twitter's loss of advertisers and active user counts
- theultdev 2y agoNoone is saying that. I'm simply saying you're talking about Twitter right now because of it, and it was a small change. You know it was if you're an engineer, let's not play dumb. Not sure why everything relating to X has to be so hostile.
- rebolek 2y agoThe original change was for ideological reasons and this change is for ideological reasons too. Both are same stupid waste of time.
- theultdev 2y agoIf you think the first change was stupid, why would you support keeping it?
- mikem170 2y agoIdeological. All the people arguing both sides of this, then and now, are motivated by ideology. That includes the parent post you replied to, me, you, Elon, etc. People often argue over cultural changes. And then there's politics on top of that. And in Elon's case perhaps publicity, also.
- tedunangst 2y agoBecause it's the change that's stupid.