The importance of graphics and colors vs. text varies, it seems.
Looking through this thread:
John_DiFool: the head of a bird (falcon?) in profile
digs: a custom d
LSLGuy: a custom LSL
mikecurtis: a custom mc
Thudlow Boink: Hobbes “boinking” something
Qadgop: Some kind of space monster
Frodo: Frodo Baggins from the Spectrum computer game
kaylasdad99, an off-white square
ThelmaLou, a lady’s head viewed from behind
squeegee@ a ninja with a car cleaning rod
needscoffee: a cup of coffee
panache45: some kind of abstract art piece
runningcoach: a hand propelled cart
Galactus: a comic character
Northern Piper: some stylized bagpipes
BippityBobbityBoo an old lady in a hat made to look like an old photograph
EnoySlurm: A can of Slurm
Mijin a dog’s face
Gorsnak ???
Dr Strangelove: Doctor Strangelove
Green Wyvern: A Tolkeinesque elf?
aceplace: a guitar
erysichthon: Snoopy
CardboardBoxx: A cat hiding in a box
Most of them are pretty obvious, and very few are too small to tell what it’s supposed to be.
And of course, if you click the avatar. you get to see a larger version of it.
Nice! Minimalist, local, attractive.
This, to me, isn’t true. There were definitely contingents of people who were against them and contingents of people who were for them. If you went to certain (sub)forums, you’d see avatars more in some than others. I don’t recall having an avatar on the old board. I’ve changed a couple times on this board because you’re assigned one anyway.
Im not sure what thing I said that you think is untrue.
Yes prior to avatar support being added there were people that argued for them (including me) and many that argued against them.
And now… It doesn’t seem to be a big issue to anyone because, quelle supris, none of the slippery slope nonsense has happened. It just mildly adds visual clarity of who’s who, and that’s it.
I find them significantly more difficult to remember; I don’t think I’ve memorized a single one. I’d rather there were words who told me on the forum page who last posted in a thread than some icon that’s basically meaningless to me unless I’m on my computer where I can mouse over to see the name.
I was really, really, against avatars and swore I’d never have one. But now I’ve found I really appreciate them simply because they are little memory aids that help me find my way around and keep track of who’s who and what’s what.
I was against them because I saw what so many other forums had with their full-motion, cartoon, audio, full-screen avatars and sigs and I worried we’d move in that direction. And maybe we have just a bit, but the avatars are so small that it’s hard for any of them to be too obnoxious.
!!! All this time I had assumed that it was a hummingbird, wings beating too fast to be visible, or something. Damn.
You’re probably using a theme where the avatars aren’t prominent. Do you know about the themes here? Avatars are plenty large on my phone and my computer. I do 99% of my SDMB-ing on my phone, and the avatars are a big help.
In all this time, haven’t you wondered why you’re not seeing what everyone else is?
That’s where people are different. I recognize dozens of avatars of regular posters, without any effort, and without ever having tried to memorize them. I may not remember all their names immediately, but I know exactly who they are. It’s like seeing the faces of people you know by sight.
It’s a mistake to think that everyone’s mind works the same way.
Agreed. I’m mostly text-oriented, but I like to have some kind of visual differentiator between members, even if I never inspect it closely enough to understand it. Avatars are good.
Opinions may differ, but those of Nars_Glinley, ZipperJJ, and Kamino_Neko come to mind for me.
You had me fooled the whole time!
It’s a time-lapse transit of Venus across the Sun.
I can read.
BTW, I also hate that Reuters just changed to a new format this is all pictures with just a headline. I liked it better when they looked just like our old boards, text only and a picture of something meaningful if you opened the post instead of the past few years where everything had a picture but many of them were stupid shit like an artsy pic of a Google logo that contained no useful information at all.
Thanks. Doodled it years ago for my brother to use as a logo for his bison ranch. I’m not sure he ever used it much, and then eventually folded the operation. I was always quite proud of it, though.
You should be, it’s handsome and distinctive.
On the old board, I didn’t think they were necessary to help identify different posters-a claim often made. On the new board the choice was taken away by board software that assigned an avatar of sorts, so I decided to pick my own.
Close!, it’s the one from Interplay that came out in 1990 not the one for the Spectrum in 1982 
I think the claim is that they are useful for identification purposes.
Think of it like using different colors for different lines of a subway map. The colors aren’t essential, but do help speed up usage.
Another handy thing about a recognizable avatar is when someone is typing a reply to a thread you’re reading, you see their icon appear below the last post. “Oh, look, Ann_Hedonia is typing a reply, this might be interesting.”