Improving the SDMB

[Captain_Jinks]

[QUOTE=levdrakon]
Charter Member is meaningless, unless maybe you joined in '99.
[/QUOTE]

As a newer member, I look for the “Charter member” designation, especially in learning to recognize particular SDenizens. Can’t really say I really give more weight to CMs’ posts, but I do look for it.

[elmwood]

[QUOTE=VarlosZ]
I can think of no good reason to disallow avatars (provided you can turn them off, of course). The ones that Opal linked to seemed a little too small for my tastes, but I guess the optimal maximum size would largely depend on the layout of the threads.
[/QUOTE]

32X32 really seems too small. It’s the same size as old Windows 95/2000 icons.

The sweet spot, IMHO, seems to be 64X64 to 80X80. It’s a large enough canvas to allow some measure of creativity and expression, but small enough to not be obnoxious.

For those that think avatars are always animated, that’s not the case. I don’t allow animated avatars on my site, and the most recent version of vBulletin can be configured to reject animated avatars.

Again, look at the link I provided to my forum on the previous page. The avatars really don’t take away from the adult feel of the site.

Regarding avatars and copyright, according to the Wikipedia entry for fair use:

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections § 106 and § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

   1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
   2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
   3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
   4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

I found this entry on Penny Arcade:

… These are the questions that would need to be addressed in court to determine if the artwork was covered under fair use.

Fair Use

1. The purpose and character of the use (the more transformative defendant’s use, the more likely to be fair use, whereas if defendant merely reproduces plaintiff’s work without putting it to a transformative use, the less likely this use will be held to be fair; further, the more commercial defendant’s use, the less likely such use will be fair),

Okay so let’s apply this to our little situation here. The artwork in question has been transformed and altered and it is not being used commercially. So far it looks like the artwork would be protected under fair use but we have more things to consider.

2. The nature of the copyrighted work (the more creative and less purely factual the copyrighted work, the stronger its protection),

Okay in our case the work was creative. You might have an argument here if the rest of the points weren’t against you.

3. The amount and substantiality of the portion the defendant used.

This one is harder to judge. Personally I’d say that less than 10 percent of the original artwork remains unaltered. It’s obvious that the basic shape and size of the character was used but that’s about it. Very little of your copyrighted character actually remains.

4. The effect of defendant’s use on the potential market or the copyrighted work.

Someone using your artwork as a forum avatar does not hurt you in any way. In fact all it could possibly do is increase awareness of your comic strip which is a good thing.

Like I said, it’s silly to even bring this up as this is not something that would ever go to court. But if you are going to link to websites in an effort to defend your position you should try reading them first.

-Gabe out

Of all the research I conducted, I have never heard of a forum getting a cease-and-desist order for an avatar. If it happens, all an administrator needs to to is delete the offending avatar.

[OpalCat]

[QUOTE=elmwood]
32X32 really seems too small. It’s the same size as old Windows 95/2000 icons.

The sweet spot, IMHO, seems to be 64X64 to 80X80. It’s a large enough canvas to allow some measure of creativity and expression, but small enough to not be obnoxious.
[/QUOTE]

I disagree. 80 x 80 are definitely too big and distracting–I’ve been on lots of sites with that size and I don’t like it. I don’t think 64 x 64 would be much better.

[Anomalous_Reading]

Maybe someone has said this.

First, I’m reasonably centrist on a LOT of issues. That doesn’t make me a pleaser, it means I have common sense and don’t like babies going out with the bathwater.

I do see an ongoing issue that just gets on my ever last nerve. I think if a person, whoever they are, and regardless of ideology, refuses to discuss in an adult manner - or refuses to be held into account for their style of “approach,” then that should be a MAJOR factor in determining just how to moderate the individual.

While I understand the necessity of a pit policy, it DOES tend to allow people to say “Oh, I don’t go there.” And therefore avoid in some silly way the very consequences that would otherwise convince a person to act like an adult - or leave.

[Jragon]

Okay reputation system disliked, duly noted and filed away for later reference.

Anyway I saw someone else mention [img][/img] code being activated. I think this is a good idea, at least for Cafe Society and Game Room. If everyone is still iffy on the whole thing, create a subforum or two in each. Cafe Society could easily have a fitting “art critique” subforum where people could put their images in the thread. And game room has tons of possibilities, on other forums there are “guess the screenshot” games where people post images from obscure games and movies and have people guess where from, image wars where people post an image to “beat” the above image, and, one I’d REALLY like is a Walkthrough and Vido Game Questions forum where people can post game walkthroughs (and possibly Let’s Plays) with notated maps and screenshots of the locations of objects in hard to discribe locations right in their posts.

[Lynn_Bodoni]

When we had images enabled, a few people abused the privilege. It was a nightmare to moderate, and overloaded the poor server, which generally decided at 3 PM EVERY FRIGGING DAY to go sit in a corner and flip its lower lip up and down, going “wubbawubbawubba”.

[jackdavinci]

My two cents… It seems like a cool idea, if ads can really generate that much revenue, and the revenue can really make improvements to the SMDB. Good to see the ball get rolling!

I don’t care about the charter membership title thing but other people do and I don’t have any objection to keeping it. I like some of the creative ideas people have had though, with other things to do with the title.

The rep system sounds like a really cool thing but I don’t see it being useful here, if anything it would needlessly complicate things - we already have a “report this post” button.

I would really prefer if avatars was an option because I also am incapable of forming mental profiles of people based on text whether it’s their name or their style or whatever, pictures would help me associate posts with the people who wrote them. That said, definitely let people turn them off, in fact, maybe make avatars off the default. I’ve never heard of there being any copyright issues over avatars. I’ve always understood them to be considered fair use. Also, I wouldn’t object greatly, but I don’t think we need to have inline images. It’s just as easy to link to the image elsewhere, and it has to be hosted elsewhere anyway.

I’d like to see quoted text as an option in searches. I don’t think “The bat man” should be rejected as an overall phrase if it’s in quote just because it contains some three letter words - the quotes should make it effectively a unique eleven character search string. Altho really, I’d like to see short words that are nouns allowed if the new server set up can handle it. I haven’t seen all of the various problems we have with searches on other boards I’m on. If not for the privacy issue I guess we could outsource for free to google.

I’d also like to see the sig line be limited to only enough characters to make one line, however I’d like people to be able to use it to link to their own website, whether or not it was considered promotional.

The ads the way they are now is fine. I wouldn’t mind text ads along the side or probably even graphic ads. Too many text ads between posts might be annoying. Please, please, no animated ads, no spyware/malware ads, no pop ups or pop unders, or ads that cover the entire screen.

[istara]

[QUOTE=Lynn Bodoni]
When we had images enabled, a few people abused the privilege. It was a nightmare to moderate, and overloaded the poor server, which generally decided at 3 PM EVERY FRIGGING DAY to go sit in a corner and flip its lower lip up and down, going “wubbawubbawubba”.
[/QUOTE]

If the images are hosted on a third party server, it shouldn’t make a difference should it?

Either way unless people are competent enough to make nice small thumbnails that link to bigger images, which 99% of internet users seem unable to do, I can happily live without images, or just links to images.

Regarding reputation: no thanks. This isn’t high school. We don’t have it now and no one misses it.

Regarding avatars: so long as I can switch them off, or they are MINUTE in size, maybe. And so long as those of us without avatars don’t have some [?] type generic mystery head icon but just remain as we are now. To be honest I don’t particularly want to see people’s faces. I prefer to think of people as just bits of text. I even less want to see faces of stylised elves with violet eyes blue hair and airbrushed diaphanous skin.

Regarding sigs: one line possibly, but better if the board software can force them to appear no more than one time per thread, and better still if we can opt to hide/ignore them all, or hide/ignore those from certain users.

If we ever get to a stage where we have half page long sigs full of unicorns, rainbows, ascii and multi-coloured quotes from crap emo poetry and tacky love ballads in lame italic fonts, then I will personally press the special red button on my keyboard that sends a ten petatron cyber-zap-pulse through the interweb and fries the server inspiring my distaste into black sooty dust.

Regarding titles: I would like to keep the Charter Member title. I do think that Previous Paid Members probably deserve some acknowledgement as well. It is something rather unique to the whole SDMB history. Perhaps “Post Charter Member” or something. I would not particularly like to see custom titles, in fact I would loathe it. I would enjoy seeing punishment titles for offensive posters.

Regarding quotes in searches, if such a thing is possible technically with the way the archive is structured and indexed it would be extremely useful.

[Cicero]

Makes sense to me.

[Tripler]

[QUOTE=istara]
I prefer to think of people as just bits of text.
[/quote]

You want to live in the Matrix?

@istara

If we ever get to a stage where we have half page long sigs full of unicorns, rainbows, ascii and multi-coloured quotes from crap emo poetry and tacky love ballads in lame italic fonts, then I will personally press the special red button on my keyboard that sends a ten petatron cyber-zap-pulse through the interweb and fries the server inspiring my distaste into black sooty dust.

Istara, why do you hate America?

Tripler
I kid! I kid!

[norinew]

@istara

multi-coloured quotes from crap emo poetry

Amen! If it’s real emo poetry, there won’t be any colors. It’ll just be black on black! :mad:

[elmwood]

[QUOTE=istara]
If we ever get to a stage where we have half page long sigs full of unicorns, rainbows, ascii and multi-coloured quotes from crap emo poetry and tacky love ballads in lame italic fonts, then I will personally press the special red button on my keyboard that sends a ten petatron cyber-zap-pulse through the interweb and fries the server inspiring my distaste into black sooty dust.
[/QUOTE]

Considering the demographics of this message board, do you really think it’s going to happen?

Besides, the most recent version of vBulletin allows admins to have a LOT of control over signatures, even by user group. These are some settings from the admin control panel:

Can Upload Images for Signature
Yes No

Can Upload Animated GIF for Signature
Yes No

Signature Image Maximum Width (pixels)

Signature Image Maximum Height (pixels)

Signature Image Maximum Filesize (bytes)

Signature Permissions

Can Use Signatures
Yes No

Maximum Characters in Signature Including BBCode Markup

Maximum Characters in Signature Excluding BBCode Markup

Maximum Lines in Signature

Allow BB Code
Yes No

Allow Basic BBCode
Yes No

Allow Color BBCode
Yes No

Allow Size BBCode
Yes No

Maximum Value of x for BBCode

Allow Font BBCode
Yes No

Allow Alignment BBCode
Yes No

Allow List BBCode
Yes No

Allow Link BBCode
Yes No

Allow Code BBCode
Yes No

Allow PHP BBCode
Yes No

Allow HTML BBCode
Yes No

Allow Quote BBCode
Yes No

Allow [IMG] Code
Yes No

Maximum Number of Images in Signature

Allow Smilies
Yes No

Allow HTML
Yes No

–

[SIZE=7]***
Autumn breeze frigidly touches ailing dreadful lives
Harshly darkness quietly surrounds the broken souls
Mellow serenades that once played between hearts
Pathetically have transformed into bitter sad songs

Somewhere beyond the flossy clouds
Cupid has lost his romancing arrows
Plays sad sonorous tunes on his bow
Dedicated to all weepy lonely hearts

Howling chilly wind blows through the mist
Sounds of sorrow spread allover the place
Fuzzy humid air submerges the inner lust
Lives decay slowly as the autumn leaves fall… ***

[Mangetout]

[QUOTE=istara]
If the images are hosted on a third party server, it shouldn’t make a difference should it?
[/QUOTE]
Colour me also puzzled by this. Image attachments to posts (as supported by some message boards) will make a difference to all sorts of things. Avatar images might also impact the performance.

But images embedded from a third-party source should not make any difference at all - the SDMB server passes a very compact piece of HTML to my browser - consisting of little more than the image URL, then my browser goes off and retrieves the image from the third party server, without any further load on the SDMB server or bandwidth.

There are potential pitfalls with image embedding though (notably, ‘image theft’ and inappropriate content), and I guess these issues are a bigger concern when you have members who haven’t invested a membership fee and therefore have less to lose…

[istara]

*istara presses red button

ten petatron cyber-zap-pulse charges up

…aim…

…fire…

elmwood ZAPPPPED into oblivion

several rainbow unicorns also die, caught in the crossfire*

[alterego]

[QUOTE=Lynn Bodoni]
When we had images enabled, a few people abused the privilege. It was a nightmare to moderate, and overloaded the poor server, which generally decided at 3 PM EVERY FRIGGING DAY to go sit in a corner and flip its lower lip up and down, going “wubbawubbawubba”.
[/QUOTE]

When was that?

[alterego]

[QUOTE=Mangetout]
Image attachments to posts (as supported by some message boards) will make a difference to all sorts of things. Avatar images might also impact the performance.
[/QUOTE]

Images will cost in bandwidth and a few reads, but bandwidth is cheap and the whole effect is negligible in general. We probably don’t use our entire allotment. If we had a savvy database guy there would be no reason to talk about the resource intensiveness of allowing images on the SDMB. Unfortunately, the database has never been properly configured or optimized for the size of the site and we are forced to digress to discussions of hamsters when we’d rather be talking about more efficient ways of communicating. This is totally bassackwards.

[Gary_Robson]

[QUOTE=jackdavinci]
I would really prefer if avatars was an option because I also am incapable of forming mental profiles of people based on text whether it’s their name or their style or whatever, pictures would help me associate posts with the people who wrote them.

(snip)

I’d also like to see the sig line be limited to only enough characters to make one line, however I’d like people to be able to use it to link to their own website, whether or not it was considered promotional.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t understand having both of these points of view simultaneously.

Why shorten the loading time and reduce screen real estate of a post by shortening two-line sigs to one line, and then increase the loading time and increase the screen real estate by adding avatars?

[Lynn_Bodoni]

[QUOTE=alterego]
When was that?
[/QUOTE]
Back in the Very Early Days. I couldn’t give you an exact date.

[Measure_for_Measure]

Above all, I’d like the owners of this board to redouble their efforts in the fight against ignorance. Three cheers for intellectual imperialism!

So ads (and revenue) are great, but I would pay to turn off moving images and even graphics.

I like google text ads. They amuse me.

I don’t care about Charter membership or even motionless avatars.

The owners should seriously consider rebranding. It would be better if every SDMB fan didn’t have to explain that they’re not necessarily a marijuana enthusiast. Blunting word of mouth isn’t the hottest idea.

Open the board up to google searching: it would bring in eyeballs.

Do other message boards ever give their members a free webpage? It might be a possible enticement, even if its outsourced.

Outsourcing: a good idea (Re: cafepress, possibly Amazon).
Frankly, I think this board could be a money-spinner. But methinks that would involve some creativity, IT investment and hiring.

[Hostile_Dialect]

@Measure for Measure

Blunting word of mouth isn’t the hottest idea.

Are you kidding? Look what word of mouth has done to the rest of the Internet!