Can we get 'how to enable avatars' added to the 'FAQ - Technical issues for Posting' sticky?

[Czarcasm]

@hajario

What if you eat paint?

Then after a while you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between the two anyway.

[Fenris]

@Czarcasm

Until that program grabs the profile picture and uses it as an avatar, it is still only a profile picture. There is no contradiction in that sentence.

Bwahahahahaahahaha…
Comedy gold.

[Czarcasm]

@Fenris

Bwahahahahaahahaha…
Comedy gold.

Do try to keep up.

[spinky]

@Czarcasm

if the SDMB wishes to differentiate between the “avatar” on the profile page and an “avatar” attached to individual posts, how might they do so to avoid confusion in the future?

The naysayers are vindicated! Avatars do cause problems if you try hard enough to find one!

[Czarcasm]

@spinky

The naysayers are vindicated! Avatars do cause problems if you try hard enough to find one!

I don’t know how you made that wild jump from my simple question but, whatever.

[spinky]

You just spent about 10 posts or so insisting that we shouldn’t call these avatars, and as far as I can tell, your only reasoning is that it’s some kind of burden to have two separate things that are accurately described by the same word. I decided to poke fun at you by suggesting that your ridiculous sidetracking argument is one of the hypothetical problems that the naysayers said avatars would bring. It’s not as funny now that you’ve made me explain it.

[Sarahfeena]

[QUOTE=Czarcasm]
However, if the SDMB wishes to differentiate between the “avatar” on the profile page and an “avatar” attached to individual posts, how might they do so to avoid confusion in the future?
[/QUOTE]

Talk about your first-world problems. It might take an extra post of clarification to avoid the descent into chaos and anarchy.

[cochrane]

@Siam_Sam

And do you know who else was born on April 20?

Clint Howard? Crispin Glover? Carmen Electra?

[Czarcasm]

@Sarahfeena

Talk about your first-world problems. It might take an extra post of clarification to avoid the descent into confusion and anarchy.

Your over-the-top exaggeration has really clarified matters. Thank you.

[tapu]

@Bob Ducca

Why would you have to?

“Hey Bob, what’s the deal with your avatar?”

“Which one?”

“The one in your profile.”

“Oh, it’s from A Fish Called Wanda.”

“Cool.”

Right after “The one in your profile,” Bob would have say “WTF? You meant my profile pic?? Why’d you say avatar? Don’t you know the difference?”

[Sarahfeena]

@Czarcasm

Your over-the-top exaggeration has really clarified matters. Thank you.

You actually were the one who did that, when you asked the question as though it was addressing an actual issue.

[kayaker]

In the words of Michael Vick, I have no dog in this fight. I can only hope that one day our children (or theirs) will settle this matter once and for all.

[Inner_Stickler]

@tapu

Right after “The one in your profile,” Bob would have said “WTF? You meant my profile pic?? Why’d you say avatar?”

Because a profile picture is a subset of avatar in the same way a yearbook photo is a subset of photograph. And why’s Bob asking which one if he’s already decided that each word refers to mutually exclusive objects?

[GrandWino]

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

[zweisamkeit]

@Czarcasm

Do try to keep up.

This is the best post so far. “Do try to keep up,” said the man who is apparently stuck in a circa-1997 Internet time warp.

[hajario]

@TubaDiva

They are not “avatars.”

TubaDiva. If you sincerely and without qualification admit that you were wrong about this, I will donate $100 in your name to charity. Choose from the list below:

1. Planned Parenthood
2. NPR
3. Habitat for Humanity
4. The Courage Campaign
5. Something else of your choice that I find acceptable

[elmwood]

I’ll just leave this here.

A pedant is a person who is excessively concerned with formalism and precision, or who makes a show of his or her learning.

✄

The term in English is typically used with a negative connotation, indicating someone overly concerned with minutiae and whose tone is perceived as condescending. When it was first used by Shakespeare in Love’s Labour’s Lost (1598), it simply meant “teacher”. Shortly afterwards it began to be used negatively. Thomas Nashe wrote in Have with you to Saffron-walden (1596), page 43: “O, tis a precious apothegmaticall [terse] Pedant, who will finde matter inough to dilate a whole daye of the first inuention [invention] of Fy, fa, fum”.

✄

Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder is also in part characterized by a form of pedantry that is overly concerned with the correct following of rules, procedures and practices. Sometimes the rules that OCPD sufferers obsessively follow are of their own devising, or are corruptions or re-interpretations of the letter of actual rules.

Pedantry can also be an indication of specific developmental disorders. In particular, persons with Asperger’s Syndrome often have behaviour characterized by pedantic speech.

✄

“If you’re the kind of person who insists on this or that ‘correct’ use… abandon your pedantry as I did mine. Dive into the open flowing waters and leave the stagnant canals be… Above all, let there be pleasure!”—Stephen Fry

[tapu]

@Inner_Stickler

Because a profile picture is a subset of avatar in the same way a yearbook photo is a subset of photograph. And why’s Bob asking which one if he’s already decided that each word refers to mutually exclusive objects?

You’re making my point. It’s preposterous from the beginning. No one would say “which one?” They would know because usage is communal and clear. Thanks, Stick.

[tapu]

@elmwood

A pedant is a person who is excessively concerned with formalism and precision, or who makes a show of his or her learning.

The term in English is typically used with a negative connotation, indicating someone overly concerned with minutiae and whose tone is perceived as condescending. When it was first used by Shakespeare in Love’s Labour’s Lost (1598), it simply meant “teacher”. Shortly afterwards it began to be used negatively. Thomas Nashe wrote in Have with you to Saffron-walden (1596), page 43: “O, tis a precious apothegmaticall [terse] Pedant, who will finde matter inough to dilate a whole daye of the first inuention [invention] of Fy, fa, fum”.

<grumble> I resemble that remark… :mad:

[Inner_Stickler]

I have no idea what point you are making any more.