Forum:Chat Emoticon Policies

The list of current emoticons is big enough, and keeps on expanding with each individual requests. I, personally feel that we should begin to make some more restrictions on emoticons. I propose the following changes:


 * On top of our 19x19 image limit rule. We still have gifs that aren't 19x19, and I believe that those should be changed quickly, or be removed until we get a gif of appropriate size.
 * That people go through the emoticons, (I'd be willing to volunteer) and remove the ones that have no particular person that wants to keep the emote/is not used by anyone regularly/has a general consensus that it should be removed. If we do this, we need to be realistic about which ones to remove. If a person wants to keep a specific emote, then we should keep it unless there is general consensus an emote shouldn't be there, then we remove it.
 * We limit the trigger amount. There are some emoticons such as the Wess emoticon and the Lemon Hearts emoticon that have a ridiculous amount of triggers. This is completely unnecessary, and we should limit the triggers.
 * That admins carefully consider all requests. If an admin feels an emote shouldn't be added to chat - then they shouldn't add it. They should give a particular reason, and tell the user why. There have been ridiculous requests that have gone through previously, and I don't want to see that happen.
 * That emotes that are of poor quality be removed. This one may be the most controversial, but we don't like images of poor quality on our articles, and I believe it should be this way for chat. Some of the emotes are very very blurry at 19x19, and that should either be fixed, or it should be removed. Why have emotes that are hard to see? It's pointless.

Now, I'm expecting a lot of people to oppose my ideas, and I respect that. I just ask that you realistically think about this, and that you not oppose this idea just because it might mean that your favorite emote might be affected. If it has to do with the image being of poor quality, and/or being too big, we have talented people here who would be more than willing to help out. I set aside personal bias, and I ask that everyone here does the same.

Thanks for considering. -- 22:06, September 10, 2012 (UTC)