Haven’t heard that one since “America, love it or leave it.”
As does stylized text such as italics and different fonts; usernames; post date and time information; buttons; smilies; purple lines dividing posts; the scrollbars, buttons and menus on your browser; icons on your desktop; the music or conversation in the background of the place where you’re viewing the site …
Nope. Not at all interested. Anti-interested. They annoy me.
I still don’t see any justification for the argument that avatars represent forward thinking.
Nonsense. It’s the free market in action.
I’d vote yes as long as the user has to pay and other users have the option to not see them if they so desire.
I don’t believe they’d be a distraction. It’s like the network bugs in the corners of your TV screen. Eventually, you don’t see them anymore.
I enjoy this board, but it can be a bit stuffy at times.
Avatar display can be turned off in the user control panel.
Avatar display can be turned off in the user control panel.
Avatar display can be turned off in the user control panel.
Avatar display can be turned off in the user control panel.
Avatar display can be turned off in the user control panel.
Avatar display can be turned off in the user control panel.
Avatar display can be turned off in the user control panel.
Avatar display can be turned off in the user control panel.
Avatar display can be turned off in the user control panel.
Avatar display can be turned off in the user control panel.
That being said, the anti-avatar crowd still hasn’t stated why they don’t want OTHERS to have the choice of seeing avatars, except for the selfish “I want others to experience the deep, intellectual posts of the smartest community on the Web in exactly the same way that I do” or “I prefer a text-only environment, and my opinion on what constitutes the ideal way to view posts on the SDMB is the only correct one.”
Why must I justify my preferences to you?
This board is much better, much more enjoyable than the boards I’ve seen that do have avatars. If that’s selfish, so what? Why am I required to take the chance that something I enjoy will deteriorate just to accomodate someone else’s selfish desire?
Not all that exaggerated. It will happen like that.
I really dont want avatars. I find the names good enough.
Because, if avatars were implemented, you have the CHOICE to get rid of them. Win-win for those that like and dislike avatars. If avatars weren’t implemented, you’re imposing your preferences on those that would like to see avatars. Win-lose.
I didn’t say that - I said “a look and feel consistent with [sic] modern message board.”
The way of the future is…a bit out there, but I reckon I’ll get used to it.
Is the SDMB better solely because of the lack of avatars? It’s the community and content, not the minimalism and old software.
Here’s the rules for avatars on my site.
*1.4.1 Avatars and profile pictures:
• Avatar images must be non-animated, ≤80 pixels in any dimension, and ≤3 KB.
[snip]
1.4.3 Profile details in general: Avatars, titles, locations and other profile details must not be misleading, offensive or inflammatory.*
There are similar rules on many other message boards.
If someone posted a truly offensive avatar, a mod would delete it and warn them. if they tried it again, they’d be suspended. If they tried again after their suspension was over, they’d be banned. However, I can’t recall ANYONE posting an offensive avatar, ever. (On my site, users need 25 posts before they can add an avatar to their profile. )
Making the argument that allowing avatars would just inspire us to throw up swastikas and fetuses is no different than the argument in fundamentalist Islam that women must be kept covered so men aren’t “tempted”. If Dopers are really the type to so readily represent themselves by avatars depicting swastikas, Hitler, turds, and so on, it it really the special, elite, intellectual place so many claim it is?
No, I get it just fine. I don’t care. And guess what? Repeating it eight times will not change my mind. I don’t care, I don’t care, I don’t care, I don’t care. Wait, missed one. I don’t care. There.
Yes. Along with whines of “But we have avatars! Why caaaaaaaaan’t I have a four inch glittery pink unicorn with a rainbow horn at the bottom of all my posts? You can turn it off!” And yes, I suppose it is elitist get off my lawn snobbery. But frankly, I have been in the wasteland that is avatar laden, multi background color lots o’ pics in posts message board land, and I will not see this place overrun by the vapid bubble headed leet speaking morons who inhabit them! There are tons of them out there, and yes, they allow pretty pictures and pretty avatars and are free. They’re also free of content. What, we should lower the tone of this board simply because other boards pander to the lowest common denominator? NO. I have never been a fan of the argument “but everyone else is doing it.”
Oh. Well.
Slippery slope! Slippery slope! If we let teh gays get married, then eventually we’ll have to allow polygamists marry, pedos marry 10 year old kids, pet lovers marry their dogs, and Dopers marry suits of armor!!
As I said before, and as demonstrated on thousands of otherwise intelligent message baords that permit avatars, their presence alone isn’t going to attract the MySpace/typical teen/L33T crowd. There’s nothing on the SDMB that would appeal to them. Their peers aren’t here. Discussion about obscure, often geeky topics are the last thing they want to participate in.
Yeah, pretty much exactly what I was saying. And guess what? Dismissing legitimate concerns out of hand by mischaracterizing them still doesn’t make them any less legitimate. This board sets a tone. And those who don’t wish to see that tone diminished by cartoony done to death avis have opinions every bit as legitimate as yours. We’re all paying members. One of the reasons I gladly pay without grumbling is the distinct lack of visual garbage found on other boards.
And as I said: I don’t care what they do on other boards. I care what they do on this one.
Bolding mine.
Way to put words in my mouth that I didn’t say. I said nothing about people who LIKE avatars. I said that “if avatars or the lack thereof is the sole reason that someone would choose to join this board or not…”
If not having avatars on the board is the breakpoint, you can’t stand the place and would never darken its doorstep, then you’ve obviously not going to fit in here. If you like avatars and would prefer to see them but are willing to give the place a go anyway, then you’re going to have more success.
I use the general you here, not aimed at anyone specific.
It could happen now, except with inappropriate sigs. But it doesn’t for the most part. And when it has in the past the mods have easily taken care of it. I don’t see why it would be much different with avatars.
I’m on three other boards. All are free. All allow avatars. Two allow animated avatars (gasp!) Two are obviously heavily moderated. There are no problems with offensive avatars. They aren’t that distracting. There’s no leet speak, image-filled sigs, or any more of that trash.
Why shouldn’t we have an image to hang a name on? So far the only reasonable argument I’ve heard is time-outs. Honestly, I’ve never had that many problems. I don’t post at lunch-time and I only occasionally have to wait more than ten seconds. There’s webcomics I read that time-out more than that.
On thing many people don’t realize is that this board did allow html linked graphics on this site at one time. What was the length of time that lasted before it had to end? 6 months? Due to their stance against the illegal use of copyrighted material they didn’t want to deal with the liability of a poster displaying copyrighted material on the board. They also didn’t want to deal with the bandwidth theft that was occurring. Too many people were linking other sites graphics to display on this board. Will the board be hosting the graphic? Will they assume liability if they do host it?