Re: [ietf-822] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-crocker-inreply-react-03.txt

Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com> Fri, 23 October 2020 15:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 616FB3A0FB2 for <ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 08:56:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mrochek.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vOBsNoqWmEGU for <ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 08:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from plum.mrochek.com (plum.mrochek.com [172.95.64.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5E973A0FB1 for <ietf-822@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 08:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01RR54IM5P3K007ZJY@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-822@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 08:51:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mrochek.com; s=201712; t=1603468262; bh=zm9lxuFEKcReyDLo7eZXXE9P4yPyRzpsV38+hGK/rIE=; h=Cc:Date:From:Subject:In-reply-to:References:To:From; b=ADnhtF+JNwkErQ6P75vsRw0yUr6agkdPYl7gjRHwNKuyK29q0+lyaERSAIGx+so9X vL3hmi/sV3g3wcF6tewAMSvUlo5seuDUmudtuKgftbel89afXa5DkohsxkjaMEkk2O Ti6m3THJGvTVJHsh5AaiPpjNlNu+vIvFzTs8ik24=
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01RQN4TDY6V4005PTU@mauve.mrochek.com>; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 08:50:58 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: ietf-822@ietf.org
Message-id: <01RR54IJXJAQ005PTU@mauve.mrochek.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 08:43:37 -0700
From: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Fri, 23 Oct 2020 08:32:42 -0700" <b517fa7a-ab81-027a-8850-f246c06fbcb7@dcrocker.net>
References: <160337881491.27133.9061463868224826181@ietfa.amsl.com> <295d4e28-c76f-b54a-cc2c-0e389bcb678a@dcrocker.net> <7224fa10-fd8c-19d3-f59b-8415b07db77b@cketti.de> <01RR52LD7SLE005PTU@mauve.mrochek.com> <b517fa7a-ab81-027a-8850-f246c06fbcb7@dcrocker.net>
To: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-822/cm-wEMF4YZ3ktqmNCVF0GFcnudU>
Subject: Re: [ietf-822] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-crocker-inreply-react-03.txt
X-BeenThere: ietf-822@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Internet Message Format \[RFC 822, RFC 2822, RFC 5322\]" <ietf-822.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-822>, <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-822/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-822@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-822>, <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 15:56:09 -0000

> >> 1. There will be users who won't care about emoji reactions and will be
> >> annoyed by them.

> For any action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.  In this case
> that means doing anything is certain to result in someone, somewhere
> being unhappy about the action.  Ultimately, this is a user-to-user
> issue, not something to fix in the software...

> >  Being able to filter out messages by header-field is a
> >> fairly common feature of email clients.

> Yes, but it's one of many features that average users do not know about
> and have no motivation to learn.

It occurs to me that the best solution for such users is to use a
reaction-enabled client and disable display of reactions.

I agree that asking such users to configure elaborate filters in their email
client in order to be able to avoid seeing reactions, regardless of the
specifics, is asking much too much.

Of course nothing here prevents the use of emojis in regular message content,
although adoption of this mechanism might reduce their use a bit. So this isn't
going to satisfy the true emojiphobic - and yes, such people do exist...

				Ned