Only a minority of people using a feature =/= the feature is not worthwhile having.
And clearly SDMB don’t actually think that, as there are already a bunch of features you can enable that the majority keep disabled.
Some forums have a set of images from which you must select an avatar, and they are often just abstract images.
This is the option I’ve suggested several times; genuinely I just want avatars to help track conversations, not to show off some “funny” photoshop effort.
If it cannot be personalized, why have an avatar at all? Wouldn’t a few hundred Users choosing the blue spirally image force you to track participants by their Username anyway?
You might have picked a better example. That’s one horrendous colour scheme.
I mean, I realise you were talking about the features, rather than the theme, but… my eyes! My Beautiful Eyes!
There will be some collisions, sure, but they will be the exception rather than the rule assuming a decent number of images.
Anyway, it provides another degree of freedom. Currently, if two people’s names are alike, they can get confused in a thread – so people sometimes confuse me with Mijail, shijinn or Muffin or others I can’t think of right now.
With avatars you’re unlikely to get that unless the name and the avatar is alike, within a given thread. Significantly less often.
I didn’t say it was useless, just that it isn’t a very convincing reason. In fact, it is a pretty weak reason if only a few use it. If you think it is a good reason for you, then say so. But don’t try to generalize something like that.
nm
OK. You edited in the middle of my response, so I’ll drop it. But I will say that although I don’t care one way or another on this, people who do care on both sides are using some pretty silly reasons to support their positions.
ETA: Doh, we’re both editing over the top of each other…
I did say it would be a useful feature for me, my exact words were: “I do find that avatars make it easier to keep mental track of who said what”.
Now of course it is my belief that there are others that share this opinion – and indeed such people have said as such in the other avatar threads.
I’m not really sure what your point is now: that in your opinion few people will use avatars so I must say that I am alone in wanting avatars 
It’s because these forums prefer proper capitalisation, punctuation and spelling over pretty pictures of kittens.
OK, I’m going to say what I originally wanted to say, as we are editing over each other…
There is no consensus as to what the majority want. Just because a few people stumble into a thread and state their opinion is meaningless. My opinion is that your “reason” isn’t very viable if the majority (or a sizable minority) don’t bother anyway (and I used other sites as an example).
OK, and to finally summarize my position:
I never claimed the majority want avatars, nor is it necessary for the majority to want a feature for a feature to be worthwhile doing.
But in my opinion a sizable proportion of dopers would use this feature.
Finally, it’s always worth me pointing out the reason that I want avatars (to make threads easier to follow) because many of those against the feature seem convinced it is just about looking at pwetty pictures and making the dope less cerebral.
As I said in a post above, people on both sides are using silly reasons to support their positions. Giving one silly reason to counter another isn’t very helpful. I prefer to point out the flaws on each side. If people want avatars, fine. If they don’t, fine. But be honest about it, and have an open mind.
So you keep saying. What exactly is silly about my reason?
Because if people don’t use avatars anyway, you can’t use them for recognizability purposes. Just having a few people stand out a bit won’t really accomplish anything. It is a better reason than the anti-avatar reasons, but if you are honest about it you will see the flaws in your reason as well.
No – that’s only if I accept your premise, which I do not.
In any case, it still wouldn’t make it “silly”. If I were to say a benefit of self-driving cars is that they will be able to drive almost bumper to bumper and so roads could handle more traffic – then it’s fine to be skeptical about how many people will buy self-driving cars, but it doesn’t make the perfectly valid point silly.
Good point. But I think the avatar associated with a poster should get chosen by the reader not the poster. So, I read a post from bob I see an avatar I chose for him beside his name. And the straightdope should charge a nominal fee for the good ones like asshole, nutjob, and the pedobear. They’ll be rich bitch.
Yes, and with the exception of the OP, no member of this board posts sans typos consistently.
Oh, wait, that’s not true at all and many boards that allow avatars have just as high standards regarding communication.
Welcome to the board, Gezmo. The general reason we don’t have avatars is that we prefer to emphasize what people are saying and not the flashy stuff. And yes, it’s also true that some people find that stuff extremely annoying and we’ve gotten by for a very long time without them at this point. We tend to take it very slow with things like upgrades because we want to make sure the bugs are worked out before switching over to something else that might inconvenience people. If you stick around a while, maybe you’ll see why things are the way they are around here.
This forum functions fine without avatars. It could reduce occasional confusions at which poster said what, and if Agent Foxtrot and Argent Towers are the same poster. I don’t see confusing one poster with another as a big problem here.
If the administration did want to allow avatars to reduce confusion, I’d suggest offering an assortment of monotone images of historical figures or small objects. Tasteful, and could be copyright free. Maybe one or two hundred.
It seems to me that much of the appeal of avatars is picking out the perfect image --obscure, ironic, damnclever, whatever-- and while it’s fun for a week or two, familiarity breeds contempt and most avatars look tired and precious soon thereafter.