I still wouldn’t know how to do greasemonkey based on those steps. Just saying “paste the script into greasemonkey” has no meaning for me.
Just enable the darn feature. The people who don’t want them won’t even notice, because they’ll never see they’ve been enabled (and no, it won’t leave a big blank space where the avatar is supposed to be).
I watch TV when I want to watch TV. I listen to the radio when I want to listen to the radio. I read comic books when I want to read comic books. When I come here, I like the text-only experience.
This is a text-based message board. It’s not TV. It’s not radio. It’s not a comic book. It’s not a vlog.
Unsurprisingly the OP who joined the board in order to dredge up this argument again has been banned.
For the record I would use avatars if they were allowed. Not that anyone cares.
I probably should PM this but maybe someone else will have this problem too. At this step:
"Once you have entered something for “name” and “namespace” click OK.
A box opened that said: “Choose your preferred text editor”. I did that, then the following:
“That will open a new window showing the text of the new script we’re about to add. In that window there will already be some stuff entered, including the name and namespace that you entered in the step above.”
Didn’t happen.
He just got a hair up his ass. Imagine what his avatar would have been.
Sorry about the delay-a good friend just started dialysis this week and I went for support.
Unfortunately, there is no way to quick check the Big Boards site to see which ones allow avatars, but checking the top 15(so far), 10 allow avatars. Of those ten, 2 provide avatars to choose from, 1 allows animated avatars, and 1 allows avatars of any size. I noted that only 4 are general interest boards.
Yeah I messaged Crazyhorse with this hiccup (same thing happened to me). What text editor did you choose? I used notepad and it worked ok.
You weren’t smoking a true Cuban cigar when you were uploading the virus to the mothership’s computer. It HAS to be a true Cuban or it won’t work. Typical rookie mistake.
TextEdit. I have to go do work now. I’ll check back in in a bit.
Well sure, but who the fuck can get real Cubans these days?
Castro.
This is incorrect. The way the boards look now is the way the boards would look to anyone with avatars disabled on a board that allows them – there would be no change to the formatting, and no blank square for the avatar-less. It would be identical to the current format.
Again, totally moot since this is a purely theoretical exercise, but we should at least know what we’re arguing about. Especially since the whole muffin debate never really got off the ground.
Shit. Sucked into another avatar debate. Goddamnit.
Which you can retain, by never having avatar display turned on. I don’t know why people don’t seem to get that you can turn avatars off, or that the board can be configured to have their display off by default with just one click of a checkbox.
Anyhow, there’s relatively few message boards out there that don’t allow avatars. Most are either corporate sites (however, even Apple’s support board has avatars enabled), and those that allow only anonymous posting, those running on very old or custom-made software (Matt’s WWWBoard, IdealBB, etc.). The only other outlier I’ve come across where there’s no avatars because of “board culture” is GameFAQs. Like the SDMB, it’s also retrograde and proud of it.
Reddit is probably the largest online community without avatars. It isn’t a message board in the same vein as the SDMB, though, and users can have “flair” (badges, custom titles, etc) in many subreddits. Being an extremely busy site with millions of users, it’s understandable why they don’t allow the same kind of avatars that most boards have.
I’m generally pro-avatar, but I can only think of one valid reason for avatars being disabled, even with users having the option to turn their display on and off - shared board experience. Everybody sees the same thing in the same way. It’s a very weak argument, though; different users choose to read different posts and subforums. The other reasons I’ve heard through the years – users will be forced to see avatars, users will be forced to have avatars, copyright, bandwidth, attracting teens or the wrong element, changing the tone of discussion, and so on – just don’t hold water.
Avatars are the SDMB equivalent of gay marriage. Those that don’t want them generally just don’t like them, think they’re just wrong, and they don’t want anyone else to have them, even though they won’t be affected by their presence. Given the userbase here, avatars are to the SDMB what gay marriage is to South Carolina. “It ain’t right. I ain’t even don’t want to think of no g’damn Adam or Steve, even if I can’t see them goin’ all at at.”
I’m gonna have to seriously reconsider my animated Jar Jar Binks avatar idea. Adam_N_Steve678 here I come.
Or maybe avatars are the SDMB equivalent of polygamy. A few weirdos think it’d be awesome but the rest think “Ick”. Or maybe bestiality. Not sure, but I’m sure it’s the SDMB equivalent of something.
Good call.
As an exercise, it would be interesting to have a poster opposed to them finish this sentence:
I understand that I will never see avatars if I don’t enable them and I understand that disabled the board will look the same but I don’t want anyone else having the option because ________________________.
the Bible prohibits worshiping graven images. 
This “civil rights” argument for avatars is silly if you spend two seconds to think about it. You are basically saying that the person who owns and/or operates a message board is violating the civil rights of those who post unless all options are turned on for those who post. I think some of you need to dial back the rhetoric about six notches or so, before someone starts quoting MLK.
It’s just an option on a message board.
Furbies.
Total posts in this thread:
Czarcasm 28
srzss05 23
Crazyhorse 18
Mijin 16
billfish678 14
Inner Stickler 13
Tangent 12
Gezmo 11
Just sayin’.
I think you mean “furries,” unless there’s another repulsive horror that I don’t know about.