If you like anything other than text-only (no smilies, no avatars, no images, nothing) you’re not SDMB-hip. Get with the program.
Yookeroo said:
Fetishes are right at home on a place called BDSM - er, SDMB.
Actually, this happens pretty regularly, and a mod has to come in and spoiler-box something. I’m not aware that there is vbulletin code that could require any thread with images to be tagged as such, and this would cause more enforcement pain on the mods.
What, do you want a cite? Maybe something peer-reviewed? It is my personal opinion, based on past experience, that the Dope would, if images are allowed, become lolcat central.
But, very well.
“Lolcat central” is, of course, overstatement for effect. Have you noticed that every other (there’s that overstatement thing, again) cite is a youtube link? We love our pretty pictures. Maybe we should just cut to the chase and allow videos, as well?
On this board, with our culture, with our rules, with our structure, there is no better reason for allowing still images than there is for allowing videos.
First, images will impact performance. The board is much faster now, with fewer lockups, but I’m not willing to add any extra burden to the system. Our current setup–plain text with a few smilies–is only just now supported.
A picture, so they say, is worth a thousand words. On messageboards, though, we tend to get the picture and the thousand words. If we allow images, people will use them. Notice that I said “use them”, not “abuse them.” For many people, if they can use a picture, they will use a picture. Individually, the performance hits from these images don’t amount to much (because they’re only linked from, not hosted from, the Dope), but we have an awful lot of people who make an awful lot of posts.
Second, it will be abused. It’s just another thing that has to be moderated. Another way for posters to insult each other, and another thing to be complained about and bickered over. But even avoiding the issue of rule-breaking, people will still make jokes. Now, I don’t have a problem with jokes, but I’ll never care how funny YumCat looks or how YumCat is the perfect example of PosterX, and I don’t want YumCat popping up when I’m trying to follow the discussion at hand.
Third, more rules. Be careful of copyright will be the first, and it’s a reasonable one. Only workplace-safe images allowed will be the second, and it’s also reasonable. But whose workplace are we talking about? Bikini pics OK? How about pictures of some primitive tribe discovered in Africa? Does that impact cultural diversity policies?
Lastly, there is rarely anything that can be accomplished with an embedded image that can’t be accomplished with a link to the image. The two-click rule avoids many of the problems listed above. I can’t think of a single benefit that would come from allowing images.
Seconded. wierdaaron’s script is great and has other really nice features as well. It works really well as a compromise between the image and text-only fronts. Try it!
Threads that have images/attachments are clearly marked in vBulletin with an icon next to the thread. No manual “tags” need to be added.
What experience is that? You’ve been on boards that changed their policy to allow images and they turned into “lolcat central”? Which ones?
I’m OK with that. Not sure what this had to do with “lolcat central” though.
What does any of this have to do with “lolcat central”?
Well, somebody has a one-track mind today.
Better than no tracks.
Well, I don’t really have an argument with those who are against images because of board performance issues (if that really is an issue). Same with SFW issues. But I do find the arguments that allowing pictures will degrade the level of interaction pretty unconvincing. And you’ve done, well, nothing, to support the idea that allowing pictures will end up with a board that’s “lolcat central”.
I get that those reading from work can be concerned about pictures. Although I do admit that I think we’re way too sensitive to them…shouldn’t they be, you know, working?. But, I see why they’d be opposed.
And if allowing inline pics do affext board performance, then, sure, even I’m against them.
The argument that the board will become “lolcat central”? I’m unconvinced. To say the least.
Back when we allowed images, some jokers thought that it was hilarious to put up the goatse pic. No, it’s not safe for work, and yes, we did remove those pics and others like them ASAP. However, this is one of the reasons why I’ve always argued against allowing images again. In fact, I just removed a spammer’s post, about five or ten minutes ago, with nothing but links to images. Having a rule against undesirable images doesn’t guarantee that goatse won’t land in a thread, or that it won’t appear as an OP image.
Brain bleach does NOT work, the image will stay with you forever.
I’m in favor of seeing images on the SDMB, and disagree with the slippery slope “We’ll turn into 4chan!” arguments that always come up in threads about image posting.
There are some things you’ve got to keep an eye on, though:
- Stealing bandwidth. Is the image hosted on an image hosting site or Web space the poster paid for, or it it being used without the hoster’s permission?
- “Bandwidth exceeded for this image” and broken image errors on some sites would hurt the context of photo-oriented threads.
- Someone hosting an image could redirect to Goatse, Tubgirl, a large image of the four letters in The Word That Must Not Be Spoken, or the like.
- What constitutes “safe for work?” The pedants here will argue it to the point of exhaustion. Do you want to have the boss walk in on you and seeing technically SFW but homoerotic images displayed on your monitor? (Yes, images can be turned off in vBulletin settings.)
The Powers That Be are also quite sensitive about copyright issues. regardless of compliance to fair use laws. It’s one of the reasons I’ve seen cited for the lack of avatars on the site, AFAIK; “We’d get sued by Fox if someone uses a Bart Simpson avatar!”
It’s fairly easy to moderate images on slower sites, or sites that don’t care. SDMB unofficial policy as of late, though, is “let’s not do anything that would make it harder for the mods.” Moderator duties with images would involve checking URLs to see if they’re hosted properly.
Change at the SDMB is slow, as it is with in other venues that consider themselves to be more intellectual-oriented. Images, avatars, new forums not related to Chicago, vBulletin features that are enabled on 99% of all other message boards, and the like won’t be coming to the SDMB. The only changes the board sees are goofy new rules.