Hacker News Reader

Comment by whyoh | Hacker News Reader

I, just like the blog author, disable remote images in emails. So I wouldn't get the "intended experience" anyway. Actually, does anyone besides Outlook users get the intended experience here?

Second, "reactions" are not part of the email culture or the standard email specs. It's unexpected and awkward.

So it's not being "anti-reaction" in general, it's being against some feature that only works in MS email apps, which then pops up in broken form elsewhere.

View on HN

I wonder if Gmail and Outlook interop on Emoji Reactions.

Gmail launched the feature in 2023[1].

I’ve personally not used the feature but emojis shouldn’t be images — they are after all Unicode code points. Not sure why MS’s implementation uses images at all.

[1] https://blog.google/products/gmail/gmail-emoji-reactions/

> Second, "reactions" are not part of the email culture or the standard email specs. It's unexpected and awkward.

Another old dog refusing to learn a new trick. If you want to talk about not part of email culture, let's not forget images weren't part of the original. So people got over that. They embraced it just like they embraced HTML emails and everything else. You can stand in the middle of the stream, but it's just going to go right on by you

Not everyone embraced it.

I still use a plain-text email client.

In case you haven't realized, you're the odd one out, today, in 2024. I don't mean this in a negative way - I just mean that you're out of what's usual.

I always wonder about these "you're in the minority" responses. Why is that an important point? Also, pretty much everybody on HN is "in the minority". We're a pretty narrow demographic compared to the general population.

It's an important point when the discussion revolves around "reactions aren't part of email culture" etc. Sorry for the "power users" but... email culture includes HTML, reactions and so on, today, in 2024.

And part of what irritates me shows up in your answer. This feeling of superiority of being in the "in-group" that seeps out.

Sometimes, in the echo chambers on the interwebs, some people might not actually realize they are the minority

Of course, but very often that's irrelevant. If someone is expressing their opinion about something, it doesn't matter at all whether or not that opinion is in the minority. It's still their opinion and as such, is as valid as any other opinion. To reply to someone expressing their opinion with "but you're in the minority" is just a way of saying "but what you think is meaningless". Which is both overly dismissive and untrue.

If someone is saying "I think this, and therefore everyone thinks this", then how common their opinion is becomes relevant.

Do you genuinely think the GP needs you to point that out to them?

I can't think of a single person I know that uses a text-only email client (and yes, I know more than one of them) who isn't what you'd call a "power user".

All of them know that most people don't use a plain-text email client, they just prefer to use one themselves.

Right. There’s no point for those „power users“ to talk about some obtuse email culture then, if they’re evidently not a part of that culture in the first place, but just referring to their particular pet peeve niche.

When someone responds to "email culture has embraced reactions" with "look at me, I'm special, I use a text-only email client," yes, it's appropriate to remind them that indeed, it's not at all the norm and in the end they're just complaining about a niche pet peeve.

Oh of course, I know that. There are few of us left, but I still look at modern email, full of fonts and images and needless copying of the entire thread on every reply, and I say "No. This is ridiculous, and I decline to participate."

The idea of "reactions" to email is, to me, silly and unnecessary.

Good for you. But not everyone is going to cater to your preferences.

Emacs?

Yes.

Though so. I do, too. high five ;)

This isn't really that though.

The context here is in how hot-garbage the feature is for people not using Outlook.

If the experience for all users was simply a thumbs up appearing in the subject line on sent emails, maybe I'd see the point you're trying to make. Instead, it's generating a complete email that occupies the same workflow as other actually important information.

If you think a thumbs up response to an e-mail carries the same importance as a written message being directly sent to the user, you are the person who is clearly in the minority.

> If you think a thumbs up response to an e-mail carries the same importance as a written message being directly sent to the user, you are the person who is clearly in the minority.

oh, i'm in the minority alright but for totally different reasons than the incorrect nonsense you've just spouted. i think email is totally broken/useless at this point. to me, anyone still using email for personal communications is an ancient curmudgeon stuck in ways and unwilling to adapt to modern times. maybe corporate emails where it is only used for work purposes can remain some what clean. for personal email where everyone decided that it is okay to spam into oblivion any and every email address you've collected or bought with sales/promos/coupons/attention seeking/pr releases/etc without asking, email is ruined

Most corporate users are Outlook users - looking at the stats for some of our customers, most of their messages go straight back to Exchange instead of any other e-mail host

Reactions was also not part of the chat culture a decade back.

At least I don't remember anything similar in IRC or ICQ.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com