A manifesto for ⁂ as a symbol for the fediverse
https://symbol.fediverse.info/
@FediverseSymbol Asterism does not exist in a vacuum. It was not added to Unicode for fun so that it's use case could be found later.
Asterisms are still used for purposes such as dinkus. Indeed I regularly use it for that myself.
Attempting to repurpose an already used symbol has strong "move over loser, we are taking this" vibes.
You want something that is part unicode? Fine, do it the hard (but correct) way like everyone else and submit a proposal.
Attempting to repurpose an already used symbol has strong "move over loser, we are taking this" vibes.
You want something that is part unicode? Fine, do it the hard (but correct) way like everyone else and submit a proposal.
#^https://unicode.org/emoji/proposals.html
@chris A character is not an icon. A unicode charcter varies in look based on the font loaded.
This is why no logos are unicode characters of emojis. You do not control how they look.
The example on their page uses a specific font where the spines of the "stars" almost touch and look like interconnection. Most fonts do not do this for asterism.
You can also have a font that flattens the pryamid structure.
@chris Indeed there is nothing to stop a font having the three * in a row as the more common dinkuss. Or using different style stars. Perhaps three "Stars of David". Would this mean that the fedi is pro Isreal. What about three inverted pentagrams. Does this mean we are all satanists?
The look of a unicode character is not fully in your control. Look at emoji on iOS and then on Android.
@chris Add to this an Asterism is not a great logo even with a "good font"
It looks closer to a bunch of snowflakes. Is that what the fedi is, a bunch of snowflakes. Nice way to give ammunition to those that do not like it.
Or perhaps it is three cats leaving the room as others have suggested?
@chris Why trade an actually logo for a unicode character whose look can and will vary and which looks worse than the current logo?
@chris Why was this new "icon" selected? Let's see what people think?
@chris Do we need a unicode character?
@chris What you see here is that the vast majority (at least of my followers) do not think this is a good idea.
The old logo (while not perfect) is better.
@chris And ask yourself this. Do we really need a logo at all
@chris What is the web logo? Oh right it does not have one.
What about Mail? @ you say. I think not. When an email is listed on a website or business card it is rare to see @ followed by the username (indeed it would look like a fedi address if you did that)
Rather it often have a small image of a mailbox or an envelope. Sometimes that might be an emoji, usually it is a dedicated image.
@chris It occurs to me now (long after my ranty wall of text) that you wrote,
"this ist true"
and I read this as "this ISN'T true" but perhaps you meant "this IS true".
If so, yeah… sorry about that wall of text!