Yeti? That’s bigfoot, and very obviously so. It’s the classic bigfoot pose, from the most well known “photo”. And Yetis are generally depicted as white or grey in color, not always, but mostly.
Your comment is like someone posting a very clear image of a watermelon with the title “oblong melon” and you commenting “Why is it “Oblong melon” and not “honeydew”? Is* honeydew trademarked or something?”
That doesn’t make sense. The motivation for adding it was to let people say “Bigfoot”. If companies draw a generic hairy creature then it isn’t communicating that.
Why is it “hairy creature” and not “bigfoot”? Is bigfoot trademarked or something?
Yeti? That’s bigfoot, and very obviously so. It’s the classic bigfoot pose, from the most well known “photo”. And Yetis are generally depicted as white or grey in color, not always, but mostly.
Your comment is like someone posting a very clear image of a watermelon with the title “oblong melon” and you commenting “Why is it “Oblong melon” and not “honeydew”? Is* honeydew trademarked or something?”
D’oh yes, that’s what I meant.
It was obviously a mistake. Chill.
deleted by creator
It leaves it open for creativity, though.
That doesn’t make sense. The motivation for adding it was to let people say “Bigfoot”. If companies draw a generic hairy creature then it isn’t communicating that.
Thanks. I agree with you now. I hadn’t seen this proposal doc. Also, being another popular fantasy creature emoji didn’t occur to me.
Maybe not to get sued from the company? Just guessing