Agreed.
I don’t run Firefox and don’t have the script. I’m curious if it has assigned a photo to me.
The default-assigned avatar feature is currently offline pending modification to make it an optional feature, but I recall that you didn’t have an avatar assigned when it was on.
PS you can use the script in Chrome as well, and there are some methods for getting it to work on Safari, the iphone/ipad discussed in the script thread, FWIW.
How do I do this, please? Is that by setting the url in my profile to none, or some other way?
Exactly. It is discussed in the Avatar Script thread (Want to see avatars on the SDMB? Here's a script. - About This Message Board - Straight Dope Message Board) at about post 180. I would prefer to keep instructions for using (or not using) the script consolidated in one thread for the benefit of future posters that want to learn about it. But the short answer is just set your avatar to “none”.
Incidentally you weren’t assigned a default avatar by the system. Out of the 140, 000 users ever registered here, about 500 had clear enough posts that were easily found indicating that they intended to share an image linked to their user name. They are the only ones with a default avatar assigned at the moment.
I usually use Chrome so I’ll have to look into it. If I can get past my usual laziness.
Even aside from the privacy issues, there are issues with how a person wishes to present themselves.
Scenario 1: A poster who is an ardent Whig links to a Tory political blog and says “Hey, look at what those idiot Tories are up to now”. The script follows the link and grabs a photo from that site. A new user signs up, downloads the script, and sees a picture of a Torie blogger next to the Whig poster, and assumes that the Whig poster chose that picture deliberately.
Scenario 2: A poster puts a picture of their Halloween costume up on Facebook. It’s a picture that they don’t mind others seeing, in the context of it being labeled as a Halloween costume, but doesn’t want that to be the image they present of themselves year-round.
Scenario 3: A poster has a relatively common username. When the script goes looking for a picture for them, it finds a profile picture attached to someone else with the same username, on a different forum. Later, someone from that forum joins, starts using the script, and is very offended when the first poster insists he’s not that person. “But you’re using his avatar!”.
Nor is “You can disable or change your avatar” an acceptable answer. If I don’t want a misleading avatar showing, I should have to do… nothing at all. Many members of this board aren’t even aware of the existence of this script, much less the fact that it can assign avatars not chosen by the user.
It’s reasonable for the script to use a picture specifically chosen by someone running the script. It’s reasonable for it to use a picture in someone’s profile, and it’s reasonable for it to use a picture posted to the SDMB Photo Gallery thread. It’s not reasonable for it to get images from anywhere else. If you feel it’s important to have images associated with everyone, you can do like some blogs do and have it generate a random image for each person.
I dont really want to know about the avatar script. It doesnt bother me that you have it, but I dont want to have to dig through a 5 page thread in order to opt out of something I never wanted anything to do with. Thank you for answering my question here.
If someone assigns me an avatar representing what they think of me, then thats fine. Some computer script matching me up to a photo based on god knows what programming of its own and representing that as me is a different matter, and not something I like at all. One individual (Crazyhorse, in this instance) choosing my avatar for me, to be displayed to all users, is not that great either.
The default should be that I have no avatar unless I opt in.
If a person doesn’t use avatars they aren’t presenting themselves in any way to others who do.
This is assuming a lot about the logic of how the avatar script might identify an avatar and is an incorrect assumption. I mentioned that in fact an avatar isn’t necessarily an accurate representation of the poster it is affiliated with and if you saw the avatars that the 1500 users of the script have selected for themselves you would realize not many consider it a definitive statement about who they are or any of their possible beliefs.
If they don’t use avatars they aren’t presenting themselves in any way to others who do.
This is assuming a lot about the logic of how the avatar script might identify an avatar and is an incorrect assumption. I mentioned that in fact an avatar isn’t necessarily an accurate representation of the poster it is affiliated with and if you saw the avatars that the 1500 users of the script have selected for themselves you would realize not many consider it a definitive statement about who they are or any of their possible beliefs.
If you don’t use avatars you cannot have a misleading avatar. If you aren’t aware of the existence of an avatar script and don’t wish to assign one to yourself, all you need to do is “nothing”.
It is reasonable for me to follow any link provided to me by a poster on this board and look at the image in whatever context I choose.
You don’t need to do anything nor do you need to know about the script if you don’t want to.
What others choose to place on their monitor is none of your concern. If you are concerned anyway though, I provided a link that tells you how to prevent an avatar from displaying for you, and also told you that none is displaying for you anyway.
If you don’t use avatars, you don’t have an avatar. If others elect to assign you one that is something between them and their monitors.
Generous of you to tell him what he can do.
Ok, so it’s ok if he assigns you a picture for his own uses. Is it ok if someone else assigns you the same pictures? Is it ok if this second person says “hey crazyhorse, send me the list of avatars you use; it’ll save me some time”? Is it ok if crazyhorse automates the process (for himself) of assigning these avatars to people (for himself) by using his programming abilities? Is it ok if someone then requests a list of his automated avatar assignments? Is it ok if that someone themselves automates the process of requesting crazyhorse’s automatically-generated list of avatar assignments? Which, if any, of these scenarios require that he allow people the ability to “opt out” of having him decide on an avatar for them for his own uses?
This is, I think, the crux of the disagreement. If someone isn’t using an avatar, they aren’t presenting themselves in any way to others who do, and should have a reasonable expectation that they aren’t. Your script may nonetheless assign an avatar to that person, and script users will see that avatar and have no way of knowing whether it was deliberately chosen or pulled at random. It’s true that the subject may be completely oblivious to this, much like someone with a “KICK ME” sign taped to his back.
Yes, it will only appear to people who are using the script. So what? If I show up at a party wearing a white t-shirt and to 20% of the attendees, I appear to be wearing a picture of Vincent Gallo in his underwear or a close-up image of what I can only pray is ground beef, and I have no inkling of it, that wouldn’t be cool.
Agreed, but others aren’t choosing—your script is choosing and presenting it to them as a group. You don’t seem to see a distinction, but I do.
Yes, if people choose to assign me an avatar on their monitor, I dont have a problem with that. If an avatar shows up on their monitor that they havent chosen then it is natural for them to assume it is something that I have chosen. In fact, you and your program would have chosen it. This misrepresents me.
It boggles my mind that you dont see why you choosing other peoples avatars for them is a problem, but I am happy that I didnt and now shouldnt have that happen.
As has been noted several times already, if a script user elects to share their collection of custom avatar URL’s with another script user that is entirely their prerogative. If I choose to share my choices for assigned avatars with all users of the script, that is too. (Although I’ve already said the system is offline for yet more modifications to address the unfounded concerns of unrelated bystanders. If and when it returns it will be an option script users can choose, not a default)
I think most if not all who do view avatars here understand that such a URL might or might not be the way the poster presents themselves in general. It isn’t like a person with a kick me sign on their back unless seeing that sign requires special glasses and those who wear the glasses understand the lens through which they are looking.
The bottom line is that apart from some users choosing to view avatars there are countless ways one might be presented, heralded, mocked, or otherwise seen by the entire world based on their participation in an public message board. I generally try to be accommodating to those expressing concerns about something in which they actually have no say nor any legitimate interest. I have taken a lot of totally unnecessary steps to ensure that even those with unreasonable concerns about something a sub-group of dopers choose to do in their own time, on their own computers, get accurate answers and reassurances. But none of this is required of me and I’m close to opting-out of that role and just handling these decisions without discussion.
I could host a website with what I consider to be an interesting collection of links from around the web related to dopers, print T-shirts with SDMB user names and my artistic representations of their appearance and mail them to all my friends, or maybe even start my own message board with the express purpose of mocking posters here. But that isn’t me.
I’m afraid that trying to be accommodating to all has created a false sense of entitlement among some non-avatarians here, but frankly there is no obligation on anyone’s part to continuously explain and re-explain the motives, usefulness, reasons for wanting, or ways to ‘opt-out’ of something that they haven’t opted into and is none of their concern.
Anyone who wants to install the script is welcome to, and anyone who doesn’t is welcome not to. Any discussion about what avatar displays for whom within the script is purely for providing information to users of the script and not a voting system for those who don’t.
Are all users of your script aware that the script sometimes assigns avatars to those who havent chosen them, based algorithms that only you know? I think I downloaded the script at one point to check it out, but it was never clear to me that that was happening.
The whole point of this script was that people who wanted avatars could have them and people who didnt want them didnt need to worry about them. If your script assigns avatars, it would polite to mention that the people affected, both users and non-users. Otherwise non users are incorrectly assuming that they dont have an avatar representing them, and users are incorrectly assuming that the avatars they see were chosen by the poster. Choice of avatar says something about someones personality, sense of humour, likes etc. It bugs me no end that you have decided what kind of avatar people should have, according to your preferences, and without telling people. It is not something that you just see yourself. Your choice is being displayed to other people as if it were the posters choice. That is misleading.
I also think a notice should be put in the portrait gallery thread that unless you do x, y or z, users of the avatar script may see a picture you put there next to every post you make.
Its one thing to have your picture somewhere off-site where it can be looked up, and another to have it constantly displayed in every thread.
I think this would help avatar users, because people might choose to find something that is more representative of their on-line personality than a photo.
“False sense of entitlement” is dead on. But in the interest of meeting the opposing side half way, I’ve done the leg work for those of you who are willing to make the slightest bit of effort to control what others see. Go to your profile > About Me and C&P this into the biography listing:
SDMB Avatar: http://i47.tinypic.com/1582ibr.png
It’s a solid white square so no one will see anything for your avatar (unless they choose to over-ride it, I suppose).
I await the cries of ‘but I don’t want even that!’…
Honestly, who cares. We are not downloading and re-circulating your picture on some porn site. Please explain the difference between me clicking on your gallery pic and opening it on my desktop and having it open beside your post.
SDMB Avatar: http://null
(i.e. a link that doesn’t go anywhere) works just as well.
I’m trying to cut back on accommodating unfounded concerns with replies but you haven’t raised these questions before and I don’t mean to cut you off based on my fatigue from answering others ad nauseam, so I’m going to try one time.
If you have selected an avatar for yourself, it very well may reflect some of these things about you like personality, humor, likes, etc. That is why most people want to see avatars. If you have elected not to have an avatar it becomes a question of what those who want to see avatars decide to assign to you for their own display.
The avatar system did select about 500 avatars for users who do not elect to participate in the avatar system. This was entirely for the display on the computer screens of those who do wish to see avatars, and as someone who doesn’t want to display one it becomes irrelevant to you what their choice might be.
Purely in the interest of reassuring you and others, but not in an effort to justify or beg permission, I will add the following:
The default selection of avatar is currently disabled and may or may not return in the future but presently it’s a non-issue.
Not one avatar that was selected by default was in any way mocking, disrespectful, or otherwise ‘embarassing’ to any user - at least to the extent that it is something they have already chosen to share online with the entire public.
Script users could actually determine that the avatar wasn’t something that poster selected for themselves. They would have no SDMB Avatar text in their profile, would have no Avatar image uploaded directly to their profile, and yet would still have an avatar. So it would always be clear to anyone who cared enough to check - which most probably don’t. As someone who doesn’t want an avatar you are actually assigning a lot more importance to them than most of those who do.
Despite all this, a way was built-in to the system to say you want out, even though you aren’t in, by following the instructions provided in the script thread and above by **Jain **and Jragon. This will not prevent other users from assigning you an avatar themselves if they want, nor will it prevent those users from sending their URL for your custom avatar to each other, but it will prevent the script from selecting one for you if and when that feature is turned back on.
If and when that feature is turned back on, you would only get an avatar assigned if you posted a link that made clear you wanted to share that image publicly in some context, even if not in the context of an avatar.
The script specifically looks for “SDMB Avatar: none” and does the right thing. No need to come up with your own empty images or bogus urls. By the way, “http://null” could actually slow down your page loading times because the browser has to attempt to look up the name “null” (and even better, it might be a real computer on your network). On some browsers, it could also cause your avatar to be a broken image link. Just use “none” and you’ll be fine.