I like avatars, but I can see both sides of the issue here. Maybe the avatars can be smaller than average.
I like avatars. I’m terrible at remembering names so I never realize that the person who posted Y is the same person that posted Z around here. I’m much better at remembering avatars though so they’d provide better continuity.
While I initially voted no, never, I’d have no problem at all with them assuming there was no slowing down of the board and I could turn them off. To me they are like visual muzak - annoying and serving no purpose (for me) and I prefer not to have them on, but if I can turn them off, it’s all good. As long as they aren’t straining the hamsters.
I vote with blondebear– avatars aren’t horrible things. But, I’m used to the Straight Dope as a strictly text based forum, and that’s part of it’s character. If avatars became a part of the experience here, I would probably spend even more of my internet time on a particular message board where I am already represented by a picture of my latest knitting masterpiece.
I must say, I’m a little surprised at the results so far: 34% for, 56% against. I thought the results would be closer.
I did too, actually (although by my calculations, it’s 39% who want them). I guess the people who don’t like them are in the right place. It still kind of bugs me that it is so easy to have them automatically shut off, and the 39% who want them aren’t given the option to have something that they enjoy.
In the early days of this board, we did allow images. It was hell to moderate. Many, many people posted inappropriate images, or huge images, or copyrighted images. We had rules against these things…didn’t help. The worst offenders kept right on doing it. And it overloaded our server, as well. So finally we had to disable images, even though we really liked them and thought that they really added to the discussion, when used appropriately.
However, once you see goat.se, you can’t UNSEE it. The Flying Spaghetti Monster knows I’ve tried. Brain bleach doesn’t work, eyeball bleach doesn’t work. And some idjits WOULD put goat.se or worse in a thread, just to be complete jerks. Even if it’s a one-shot poster, that’s one too many pics.
For the record, I’m in favor of having avatars, but I don’t expect that we’ll implement them any time soon. I’m not sure that our server could handle all those pics, and the demand to call them up for each thread view.
I certainly don’t want to see avatars, and understand that I could turn them off. Then, assuming there was no impact on performance, it seems easy to support allowing avatars. However, would allowing avatars change the tone and nature of the board? If so, then we are all affected, even if individually we have turned off avatars.
I really don’t know if just allowing avatars would have an effect on the tone, but would prefer not to take the risk. After all, as someone who promotes playing a game that revolves around celebrity deaths, I clearly support maintaining the highest moral tone.
With already strained hamsters, I can see not wanting/being able to have any more frills.
However, if the board were pay-to-post still, wouldn’t that cut down on the people that come up with shock photos in their avatars? It’s a moot point now, of course, though.
I didn’t answer the poll because it lacks my answer. If the board doesn’t go slow, I don’t care if it’s on, if I can turn it off or more likely I’d adblock specific ugly individuals so I can look at the pretty people.
Right now I see 34.4 (yes-SFW) + 1.6 (yes-anything) = 36%. Of course this can change at any time.
Those of you who have avatars: are these the ones you would really use? Because seeing small pictures of you really doesn’t help much. An avatar really needs to be unique in composition. Also, they’re going to have to look a lot better at smaller resolutions.
In other words, if the avatars we’re going to see are the ones y’all use now, then I’m not sure I would support it.
I think Cat Whisperer is adding the first two choices together and ignoring the third. Right now that gives 73/176 = 41.5%. It also raises the “do not want” to 58.5%.
Leaving out the people who don’t care makes the percentages pointless. What’s the point of using the percentage of people that have a strong opinion, instead of the percentage of people who have responded? If the number who didn’t care was larger, you could really be misleading. Imagine if 4% of people were for it, and 95% of people didn’t care, and someone reported 80% of people want it changed.
BTW, it’s currently at 38% are for, 52% against, with 194 people reporting.
Do Not Want. Avatars = ick, to me. They’re too big, too distracting, too annoying. Maybe if you could only make them icon size (say, 50 x 50 pixels at most), but too many are huge. Like inches huge. No.
I had to look up what an avatar was. Now that I know, I’m pretty happy we don’t have them here. Although I don’t feel strongly about it.
The beginning of the 21st millennium would be the perfect time to implement avatars 
Paying members should get them as a perk.
I voted “I don’t care,” but that’s a little disingenuous: I like the SDMB without avatars and believe avatars may (negatively) affect my experience here. Initially, I read posts without paying much attention to user names. Therefore, I rarely read a post with a perspective biased by my personal opinion of the poster. Avatars would attract attention to the poster before I read his post.
However, my philosophy precludes me from believing those who want avatars should be denied them - this would be the case even if I weren’t granted the option to disable avatars.
Will I use avatars? No.
Do I think they should be an option? Yes.
The “will bring down the tone of the board” argument is so dumb. We’re not somehow “better” than the rest of the internet. Sure, we enforce spelling and grammar and all that. If we are the shining beacons of intelligence and reason and wit like gets trotted out every time any change is proposed, the optional display of avatars isn’t going to suddenly turn us into /b/.
I don’t really care; I wouldn’t turn them on generally because it’s harder to stealth-surf the internet at work when there’s big pics of kitties and puppies, but that’s why it’s called an option.