Thanks.
Seems to me that a quote is as much of a reaction as an emoji, probably more so.
Semantically, yes, but from a software standpoint, no.
A "reaction" is a "like", but since there are more possible reactions than just
like (Even though the button says, "like"), the developers decided to call that entire system "reactions".
Developers are an interesting bunch when it comes to word use. In the realm of object-oriented programing (OOP) you don't create an object, you
instantiate it. This is a better term because there can be multiple instances of an object that appear to have the same name but they're different because they exist in a different
namespace.
Like most professions, developers like their lingo, especially when they create a new system when they can name it whatever they want.
To your point, though, "likes" were originaly added because users wanted a way to react (see what I did there?) without having to write out an entire post. This has led to a delightful improvement on forums and the like where posts that were just
This or
+1 or some other derivative polluted conversations
. Oh, but a
conversation is now a message between users and not a forum thread.
Anyway, from this point of view a
reaction should arguable be worth less then a
message! The easy solution to that is to remember that none of these numbers mean anything in real life.