Avatars revisited

[Kodos]

In light of the fact that they can be turned off by individuals who do not wish to see them, how do you feel about adding avatars to FOFC?

[SplitPersonality1]

Kodos. What the he** is a vegisexual?!? :)

[Kodos]

They are folks who enjoy legumes a bit more than the rest of us.

[ice4277]

To me, it doesn't make any since not to have them, since you can turn the option off if you don't want them. I probably wouldn't use one anyways but it would be nice to know I could if I wanted to.

[Kodos]

I must say I'm surprised how many people are against allowing others to have them just because they personally don't want to see them. I would understand not wanting them if you could not turn them off, but wanting to deny them to others seems just plain silly. Where's the harm? Could someone who voted no please explain this? :confused:

[Tarkus]

This is a silly discussion. Unless it somehow bogs down the system just add them already. Avatars are not a problem, I believe you can restrict the size. The bigger problem is when people put lame huge pictures and what not in their signatures. Now, those should not be allowed because even though you can turn them off they still seem to add more room to the post.

Tarkus

[AnalBumCover]

Originally posted by Kodos
They are folks who enjoy legumes a bit more than the rest of us.

Is this in light of a recent eBay auction of a special carrot running at over $99 million?

[Kodos]

Originally posted by AnalBumCover
Is this in light of a recent eBay auction of a special carrot running at over $99 million?

Unrelated, my friend.

[GrantDawg]

Come on, mods. Give the people what they want.

[Daimyo]

I'd like to see at least one of those who voted "no" provide a rational reason why they did so.

[vex]

I don't want them because I think that they make boards look rather kiddish at times. If there was an option to turn them off, individually, then I'm all for it as it doesn't bother me. That being said, I wasn't aware that you could turn avatars off on this certain type of board.

[Tasan]

At the top, click on my profile, then click edit options, scroll down til you see Show user's avatar in their posts?, then choose no. You won't be bothered by them then. Its that simple. Now can we get these turned on please? I'm a 27 year old who thinks this would be fun. Heck, the mods could even restrict them to a select set of team helmets for various sports if they want. (I think this board type allows avatar sets)

[vex]

I thought that that just applied to each individuals avatars, not everyones? And yes, this board type allows avatar sets.

[GrantDawg]

Show user's signatures in their posts? yes no
Show user's avatar in their posts? yes no

These are the options in your setup. You can chose to see others avatars or signatures. There is no reason for this option not be on.

[vex]

Oh, I thought that this just pertained to my signature and/or avatars.

[rkmsuf]

anyone voting no probably doesn't know how to get one or set one up.

[vex]

I do, I do!

[Marmel]

There is no reason not to have allow them, and this is coming from somebody who will turn them off.

[scooper]

Originally posted by SplitPersonality1
Kodos. What the he** is a vegisexual?!? :)

You know.... a little Barry White, some candles, a nice carrot.

[vex]

Just to make it clear though, if I can turn them off, then I'm all for them. That made a lot of sense.

[Draft Dodger]

bump

[Fritz]

i dont like them. because I dont like them I dont want you to have them.

we are talking about guns, right?

[Kodos]

With guns, I find that locking the doors once everyone is inside at the gun convention works nicely. Given enough time, the gun problem literally solves itself. ;) No muss, no fuss.

[VPI97]

Avatars would be cool.

[Franklinnoble]

I agree.

But so would the QOTM, and I've learned from experience that this isn't a democracy. This board will have the features that SkyDog likes, and if that's not good enough, take it elsewhere.

[SackAttack]

Avatars are cool. The primary problem I see is that what happens if certain individuals decide they want to push the envelope with their avatars, and it causes access issues for those who read FOFC from work? How are you going to police something like that effectively?

[Mr. Wednesday]

Is additional bandwidth a possible concern?

[TLK]

I would like them. However, I promise you folks.... it would cause nothing but trouble...

[sovereignstar]

Jim is the problem. You know he's all about the hypnotic gizmos.

[Bonegavel]

***Dear SkyDog***

the post about Avatars resurfaced again and caused severe convulsions of minor proportions in my epithelial cells surrounding my Pelvic Splaknick Ganglian and I'd like to report those responsible and respectfully request that they be sacked.

Narc-boy McNarc'y

Oh, if you don't respond to this I understand. You are probably too involved thinking up new ways to get Shorty321 even if it is only in his mind which woulnd't be good for George W. Bush since he is about the same size as Shorty123 except for the times when he steps down from the plankton shoes he likes to sport about town.

[Raiders Army]

Fuck yeah, let's use em.

[sovereignstar]

So can we use them yet?

http://the-dkbl.com/ashlee.gif

[Raven Hawk]

Avatars are the root of all evil. Next thing you know people will want to hump inflatable penguins. It's all downhill from there.

[DeToxRox]

Avatars are the root of all evil. Next thing you know people will want to hump inflatable penguins. It's all downhill from there.

Yeah I agree. Humping an inflatable penguin is quite frankly a daunting task to one up.

[SackAttack]

***Dear SkyDog***

the post about Avatars resurfaced again and caused severe convulsions of minor proportions in my epithelial cells surrounding my Pelvic Splaknick Ganglian and I'd like to report those responsible and respectfully request that they be sacked.

Hey! Leave me out of this!

[JeeberD]

I thought this was a new thread because I never voted the first time. I realized it was old when Tarkus showed up...

[korme]

Alright. I know I'm playing with a knife that's already been dipped in the mustard (i'm trying out self-proclaimed analogies), I think it's time. It will spice up the board (FOR THOSE WHO WANT IT.) For those who wish not to, you turn them off. Grr...

They're so interesting, it shows alot about a user. I recognize people at OOTP simply because of their avatars.

Skyfella, Ryno, it's time to get down with avies.
:cool:

[korme]

let me use my kewl!!!lLOLWTF bobby d avie!!

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/board/customavatars/avatar489_2.gif

[Suicane75]

I want the avatars tooo.

http://home.comcast.net/%7Esuicane/Sui.JPG

[Ryan S]

To me, it doesn't make any since not to have them, since you can turn the option off if you don't want them. I probably wouldn't use one anyways but it would be nice to know I could if I wanted to.
If you are moderating the board you have to have the avatars switched on otherwise they will go unpoliced.

I hate avatars and that reason is enough for me (and probably Skydog).

[Suicane75]

If you are moderating the board you have to have the avatars switched on otherwise they will go unpoliced.

I hate avatars and that reason is enough for me (and probably Skydog).
Just to play devils advocate, couldnt you have an avatar mod?

[General Mike]

Give me avatars or give me death.

[B & B]

Suicane's post is not lurnch friendly.

LOL

When can we start posting the NSFW content? Or at least a tubgirl avatar?

[Honolulu_Blue]

Avatars suck.

[Suicane75]

Avatars suck.
You are a poo poo head.

[DanGarion]

I want the avatars tooo.

http://home.comcast.net/%7Esuicane/Sui.JPG


OMG like you are SOOOOOO a sex offender!!!!!

[sterlingice]

Just to play devils advocate, couldnt you have an avatar mod?
Considering half the board gets up in arms any time SkyDog throws someone in the box, it's probably a headache best avoided.

Frankly, I just think they will make the board look much uglier. Sure, most people will go for a small, harmless 60x60 but then there's the idiots who have a 300x300 monstrosity that fucks up every thread they post in and they get indignant if they want it taken down because "I want to be an individual" (like so many before me have done) or some animated gif that is a giant eyesore. And, in the end, the mods have to sit there and play games like "how nude is too nude" and crap like that.

No, I've never had to deal with this on a board before :p

SI

[Honolulu_Blue]

You are a poo poo head.
You are a poo poo head X infinity + 1.

[Suicane75]

I see both sides, I just like the flavor. As for the size, we could have a uniform size limit.

[sterlingice]

I see both sides, I just like the flavor. As for the size, we could have a uniform size limit.
Well, the unfortunate thing is that it's one of those "95% of the people will do just fine but the other 5% fucks it up for everyone" and there's no way to effectively moderate because while there are only 5% that even bother to test the boundaries, they then rile up everyone else because they're giant attention whores.

SI

[Joe]

can't you just put the avatar into your signature anyway?

[JeeberD]

Nope, no pics in the sig...

[Joe]

gay

[korme]

Well, the unfortunate thing is that it's one of those "95% of the people will do just fine but the other 5% fucks it up for everyone" and there's no way to effectively moderate because while there are only 5% that even bother to test the boundaries, they then rile up everyone else because they're giant attention whores.

SI
dude... there are settings in nearly every type of message board which allow avatar size limitations to be placed. it's not like some unwritten rule that you trust everyone will follow. lol

[RendeR]

There is no quality reason beyond the moderators disliking them to not have avatars. Even the moderation of avatars themselves isn't a valid excuse as anyone seeing an out of line avatar will make it known wether its by posting about it or informing the moderators.

I understand the wish to not have assinine avatars, but the tools are in place to control the size of the images, so thats not a good reason either.

Anyone who dislikes them can turn them OFF, so those folks won't be bothered either.

So basically there is nothing to discuss. The moderators don't want them, thats the ONLY reason they aren't usable.

I don't really care either way to be honest, but I get tired of all the pathetic excuses from those who dislike them and all the whining from those that do want them.

I just wanted to get a solid bottom line to things so people can at least argue/complain about the real reason for the current situation.

Be Well john Spartan, think happy happy joy joy thoughts.

[sterlingice]

I don't really care either way to be honest, but I get tired of all the pathetic excuses from those who dislike them and all the whining from those that do want them.
Since this might as well been addressed to me, I'm throwing my 2 cents in. The size thing is only a minor issue, if any. Content, on the other hand, is a royal pain in the ass. Just brushing this aside as "you're an idiot, size is easy to control" doesn't address the real issue. It's always a pathetic excuse from others until you're the one who has some nipple you can barely see in your avatar or your use of the phrase "cowboy up" or "get hit by a car" that lands you in the box and sends the board into a frenzy.

Be Well john Spartan, think happy happy joy joy thoughts.
All that aside, I love Demolition Man :)

SI

[stevew]

While we are at it, why cant you change your undername title. I guess you only get one if you are special.

[TLK]

There is no quality reason beyond the moderators disliking them to not have avatars. Even the moderation of avatars themselves isn't a valid excuse as anyone seeing an out of line avatar will make it known wether its by posting about it or informing the moderators.

I understand the wish to not have assinine avatars, but the tools are in place to control the size of the images, so thats not a good reason either.

Anyone who dislikes them can turn them OFF, so those folks won't be bothered either.

So basically there is nothing to discuss. The moderators don't want them, thats the ONLY reason they aren't usable.

I don't really care either way to be honest, but I get tired of all the pathetic excuses from those who dislike them and all the whining from those that do want them.

I just wanted to get a solid bottom line to things so people can at least argue/complain about the real reason for the current situation.

Be Well john Spartan, think happy happy joy joy thoughts. Ummm.... have you seen some of the posts from certain folks around here?

It seems some stay here for no reason, other than to toe the line....

With avatars I cringe at coming here to see a well endowed chickie shaking her love jugs (as much as I'd love to see that).... just for some folks to think they're getting away with something for a few minutes.

I had to think twice before posting the chickies in the "Danica Patrick" thread, and didn't even dare posting the "PG" shot of Kelly Clarkson in the KC thread. I don't want it to get any worse.....

[RendeR]

Since this might as well been addressed to me, I'm throwing my 2 cents in. The size thing is only a minor issue, if any. Content, on the other hand, is a royal pain in the ass. Just brushing this aside as "you're an idiot, size is easy to control" doesn't address the real issue. It's always a pathetic excuse from others until you're the one who has some nipple you can barely see in your avatar or your use of the phrase "cowboy up" or "get hit by a car" that lands you in the box and sends the board into a frenzy.


All that aside, I love Demolition Man :)

SI


I repeat, anyone who does not WANT to see them, does not HAVE to see them, they are optional to view.

Content and quality control are inherintly covered because anyone with the slightest thing out of line will get comments about it and therefore be noticed by the moderators, or someone will nark to the mods to make SURE they get nailed.

Beyond that, if people are still dumbass enough to put up something they could get pelted for, then they deserve it.

There is no valid excuse for not allowing them beyond the pure dis-interest of the moderators. Thats all I'm really saying.

I wish I were and Oscar Meyer Weiner.....

[Suicane75]

I repeat, anyone who does not WANT to see them, does not HAVE to see them, they are optional to view.

Content and quality control are inherintly covered because anyone with the slightest thing out of line will get comments about it and therefore be noticed by the moderators, or someone will nark to the mods to make SURE they get nailed.

Beyond that, if people are still dumbass enough to put up something they could get pelted for, then they deserve it.

There is no valid excuse for not allowing them beyond the pure dis-interest of the moderators. Thats all I'm really saying.

I wish I were and Oscar Meyer Weiner.....
Those are my sentiments exactly, and i will shout them to the heavens. I just wanted someone else to do it first. :)

[RendeR]

you wish you were a weiner TOO???

[Suicane75]

you wish you were a weiner TOO???
According to alot of people I already am.

If the mods pure lack of wanting to see them is the only reason we don't have them, well that kind of sucks.

[JeeberD]

While we are at it, why cant you change your undername title. I guess you only get one if you are special.

According to SkyDog the only people who have special titles are ones who have requested them. So if you want one, ask SD for it...

[Peregrine]

I'm a big fan of not having avatars. It's not like people can't go to the millions of other avatar infested boards to show off the latest weird shit off the net.

I understand why people are pushing the "you don't have to see them if you don't want to" angle, but honestly, we're all board patrons and we should all have a vote on this, whatever our opinion is.

[JeeberD]

...we're all board patrons and we should all have a vote on this, whatever our opinion is.


Agreed. Now look at the results of the poll... ;)

[RendeR]

Agreed. Now look at the results of the poll... ;)


What Jeebs said.

[wbatl1]

Agreed. Now look at the results of the poll... ;)

Although it should be an official, stickyed thread. But I don't want them ,and I know my moderator won't allow them :D

[Deattribution]

There is no quality reason beyond the moderators disliking them to not have avatars. Even the moderation of avatars themselves isn't a valid excuse as anyone seeing an out of line avatar will make it known wether its by posting about it or informing the moderators.

I understand the wish to not have assinine avatars, but the tools are in place to control the size of the images, so thats not a good reason either.

Anyone who dislikes them can turn them OFF, so those folks won't be bothered either.

So basically there is nothing to discuss. The moderators don't want them, thats the ONLY reason they aren't usable.

I don't really care either way to be honest, but I get tired of all the pathetic excuses from those who dislike them and all the whining from those that do want them.

I just wanted to get a solid bottom line to things so people can at least argue/complain about the real reason for the current situation.

Be Well john Spartan, think happy happy joy joy thoughts.


It's easy for you to say that when you're not the one moderating the forum, but when it's your job to have to change every avatar that isn't proper, it becomes tedious - just so you can have a 'little personality'.

[Suicane75]

It's easy for you to say that when you're not the one moderating the forum, but when it's your job to have to change every avatar that isn't proper, it becomes tedious - just so you can have a 'little personality'.
Thats why I suggested an avatar mod, and it isnt like bad avatars arn't gonna be reported. Fuck, I will be the avatar mod, I nominate myself, if it ever gets that far, which i doubt it will.

And really, a few people went overboard with pics, it isn't like it happened alot.