I thought Dex had a great idea here, and voted in Mod-mail for adding as many bad stereotype smilies as we could, but I was voted down! 
I AM talking about you behind your back. It’s just that right now I’m doing to your face.
It’s nothing to do with being Jewish.
Personally I distrust smilies that smile all the time. I always think they are hiding their true emotions. This is simply unacceptable. I’m glad the smiling twit has been consigned to the dustbin of history.
In fact, we could use more grumpy smilies. My campaign will begin when I have the necessary resources in place to mount an effective challenge to the received wisdom that happy smilies such as ( ) make people feel good.
Well, this is certainly unfortunate reasoning. I’m certain no offense was ever meant regarding which smilies were chosen for this message board, not least because they’re smilies on a message board.
Whoosh.
Is it too early to put in my vote for a Pukey Smilie?
And a pony for elucidator.
Can any hint be given as to when the next upgrade is going to be?
I’m glad that those two smiles were cut. I didn’t think that the Jewish smile was offensive, but it didn’t really convey any emotion. It was just something that Jewish Dopers tacked onto their posts when someone asked them about Kosher laws or Sabbath restrictions. And as for Wally, the mods already explained that. He was more trouble than he was worth.
I’ll second the need for a barfy or pukey smile. Not anything gross, mind you, maybe just a green smile with puffed-out cheeks, to convey a feeling of nausea or revulsion. Its keyboard shortcut could be :x
I could tell you, but then they’d have to kill me.
Really? Ok, then.
So when is it? 
Personally, I would have preferred leaving the smilies active, but removing them from the clickable grid on the reply window (if that’s possible). That way, they’d still be intact in old threads, preserving the continuity, but it’d be much harder for anyone not familiar with their proper usage to accidentally stumble upon them. Perhaps after a transition period of a few months or a year, they could then be deleted, and the loss would go unnoticed.
We do not know. We’ll let you know when we do.
A pukey smilie? Ha! I farty smilie in the general direction of your pukey smilie!
How so? I’m commenting on someone becoming so offended by a message board smilie that he felt compelled to petition for its removal.
Would it be impertinent to ask what it depends on? As in… what’s affecting the time? Is it a case of focusing on other more vital things before adding something new can be sorted, for example?
He wasn’t serious about being offended.
Derleth is correct. CKDexterHaven is “so offended by a message board smilie that he felt compelled to petition for its removal.”
I’d refer Derleth to this comment:
I’d also ask Derleth his opinion on a white trash smiley, a injun smiley, or a WASP smiley.
I’d also ask whether he would consider that the appropriate uses of such smileys would be so vanishingly rare that they just would not be worth having or maintaining.
I guess it was. You’d think they’d at least try to come up with some accurate gauge of user opinion first. But I guess The Admins Know Best, right?
Wally is used as an insult, and there’s some justification in removing it (though the difference in the administration’s treatment of Wally and Rolleyes has never been adequately explained.) But what the fuck problems was Happy Orthodox Jewish Man causing? He was fun. The presence of a Jewish smiley was so delightfully inexplicable and random - the entire point of him is that he wasn’t any use.
Yes, it has. Rolleyes indicates skepticism; Wally is an insult.