this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2023
199 points (95.0% liked)

Technology

34973 readers
231 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/1255003

A Canadian judge has ruled that the popular “thumbs-up” emoji not only can be used as a contract agreement, but is just as valid as an actual signature. The Saskatchewan-based judge made the ruling on the grounds that the courts must adapt to the “new reality” of how people communicate, as originally reported by The Guardian.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Wooly@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Maybe it's just me but I see a thumbs up as sarcastic more than sincere. Like an "ok buddy, whatever you say".

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That really depends on context. I use it at work all the time to say "got it" or "sounds good." Basically, it's an approval/acknowledgement of receipt, depending on context.

On social media though, it'll be a sarcastic response.

So in this context, I would absolutely intend it as an approval/acknowledgment since it's a business contract.

[–] Kbin_space_program@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In the article, it details that the judge ruled this way because the guy had a history of accepting previous contracts with the other guy with short one word answers, so in that context, its valid.

It isn't the blanket ruling the headline makes you think it is.

Absolutely. I'm just saying that even without the context of the guy having done this multiple times, it still makes sense to see this as an approval.

I personally would never handle contracts this way, but if I sent someone a contract and they responded with that emoji, I would interpret it as an approval. If someone sent me a contract and I responded with that emoji, I would intend it as an approval. So even without the context of the guy's previous contract approvals, I agree with the judge's ruling.