Well yes, but actually no.

I definitely think this is a good idea; having emojis shoved down your throat when you're not trying to use them is annoying. However, I think a better idea is to escape emojis. Much like whiteandblackcat mentioned, you simply prepend the emoji with a backslash. This concept is borrowed from Markdown which makes formatting text significantly easier. However, what would be even better is this:

We adopt Markdown entirely
Markdown is styling text but has more functions than BBCode and is easier to understand. *text* makes it italic. `text` makes the text appear as code. ```text``` creates a codeblock, and et cetera. These functions are easy to understand with minimal hassle.

Banana

Support. The emojis are old anyway, so why are they automatic?

No support. Just use the tags. The emojis don't show up that way.

Zoomer_X wrote:

No support. Just use the

[color=black]

tags. The emojis don't show up that way.

Not everyone knows about that. I'd just rather have a simple emoji with 2-5 symbols.

I would like [emoji=XYZ][/emoji] and so, but just do :[b][/b]) - :)

Also, you should be able to do:
[emoji]This is really funny :P[/emoji] -> This is really funny

Zoomer_X wrote:

No support. Just use the

[color=black]

tags. The emojis don't show up that way.

You mean [color=#322f31]? Just use :[b][/b])

Yeah, no support. I like the emojis very much and you can literally do :[b[/b]) to prevent it showing as
Emojis are a vital part of my foruming and I'd hate to have to write a tag for each and every emoji.

mybearworld wrote:

Zoomer_X wrote:

No support. Just use the

[color=black]

tags. The emojis don't show up that way.

You mean [color=#322f31]? Just use :[b][/b])

[color=none] works as well.

banana439monkey wrote:

We adopt Markdown entirely
Markdown is styling text but has more functions than BBCode and is easier to understand. *text* makes it italic. `text` makes the text appear as code. ```text``` creates a codeblock, and et cetera. These functions are easy to understand with minimal hassle.

Should the Scratch forums switch to using Markdown?

MDCCCLXVII wrote:

mybearworld wrote:

Zoomer_X wrote:

No support. Just use the

[color=black]

tags. The emojis don't show up that way.

You mean [color=#322f31]? Just use :[b][/b])

[color=none] works as well.

banana439monkey wrote:

We adopt Markdown entirely
Markdown is styling text but has more functions than BBCode and is easier to understand. *text* makes it italic. `text` makes the text appear as code. ```text``` creates a codeblock, and et cetera. These functions are easy to understand with minimal hassle.

Should the Scratch forums switch to using Markdown?

Maintenance…just because of this one issue, we're going to have to do maintenance and win a war just because of 12 emojis…all of them outdated…

jaguar1501 wrote:

Have you ever tried to put a closed bracket after a ;-; and ended up with (..*your message*.. ;- ?

Actually I have XP for that I just use square brackets instead of parentheses since I don't want to have to change or escape the face or add a space ;-; I've also seen it change the :/ in links and files and stuff to the emoji.

HTML-Fan wrote:

everyone knows that : ( is the same as in a certain context. So it's not bad if you wouldn't do the replacement.

True, but that doesn't apply for :P and … These are the ones I use the most. the emojified one is a bit mischievous, while the emoticon is just like “eh” XP I've wanted to convey both of these at times, so sometimes I'll escape the emojification, and sometimes I'll keep it, depending on what I want the mood to be.

Super_Scratch_Bros20 wrote:

Here's how it could work to be not automatic:

[emoji] :cool: [/emoji]

will make:

Agreed XP but since now there's an emoji tag do we still need those colons on either side of it?

HTML-Fan wrote:

Or just [cool] like every normal BBCode forum does it.

… Actually this might make a lot more sense XD a lot less characters…

--Explosion-- wrote:

Evidently there are a few ways around this:
1: Put a tag between the characters of the emoji, e.g. :[i][/i]) which turns out like this —> :)
2: Make the emojis in bold: :)
3: Use the [code] and [/code] tags:

:)

4. Put a space in between: : /
5. The color tag, or italics tag, or really any tag :P

sparklepeaches228 wrote:

I support. In my opinion (and probably yours too) :) looks worlds better than .

I actually disagree, I think and are far better than :) and ;). But only for those two. And since :P and have their differences in mood, that doesn't count

HTML-Fan wrote:

I really don't understand why it's a mix of :emoji: and just emoji. That's annoying and since this isn't really meant for chatting, emojis besides :cool: are not really useful. Every emoji should be like :emoji:.

That's actually a great idea! The names could be like [smile] [neutral] [sad] etc. all the ones in the drop-down.

mybearworld wrote:

Also, you should be able to do:
[emoji]This is really funny :P[/emoji] -> This is really funny

Aaaagh that's such a good idea too, and you could put multiple emojis in one emoji tag!! I'm torn between an emoji tag and simple brackets with only names inside, not emoticons XD Maybe these could both be added? XD

MDCCCLXVII wrote:

[color=none] works as well.

hehe you probably got that from my posts, but [color=none] doesn't actually specifically do anything any non-color in the color tag works for un-emojifying emojis. So you could do [color=purplepurlpe], [color=notacolor], [color=thisistotallyacolor], [color=thisemojiwillwork] or even just [color=0] and it'll work for that, but it won't do anything else that line spacing

*end of reply chain*

EEEEEEE   DDDDDD    IIIIIIII  TTTTTTTT           NNN    NN     OOOOO
EE        DD    DD     II        TT     ::       NNNN   NN   OO     OO
EEEEEEE   DD    DD     II        TT              NN NN  NN   OO     OO 
EE        DD    DD     II        TT     ::       NN  NN NN   OO     OO
EE        DD    DD     II        TT              NN   NNNN   OO     OO
EEEEEEE   DDDDDD    IIIIIIII     TT              NN    NNN     OOOOO

< :: extension>
< :: custom-arg>
< :: motion>