The second great smiley election

Addition of smilies
The staff has had a long discussion about the possibility of adding smilies. The feeling amongst the staff (and from what I’ve read on the board, the feeling amongst the membership) is that some people like smilies, some people hate smilies, and some don’t care. We have decided that we will add a small number of smilies to the SDMB.
What smilies to add?
We will ask for submissions from the members and choose some of those submissions as an addition to the SDMB. We ask our members to make a reasonable effort to determine that the smiley is not the intellectual property of another person. If you find the smiley at another board, please get permission from the administrators of that board to use the smiley. If you find the smiley at a website, please get permission from the webmaster. We realize that it can be difficult to determine who has “rights” to the smiley; do your best. The preferred situation (from our point of view) would be a smiley created by a member of the SDMB, who has given us permission to use it.

How to submit?
Send an e-mail to []Arnold Winkelried with your proposed smiley. Please include:
[list=1][li] your SDMB username;[/li][li]a description of the provenance of the graphic;[/li][li]any e-mails you have received from a webmaster / board administrator / smiley creator granting you access to its use;[/li][li]the smiley as an attachment (GIFformat);[/li][li]a one-word description for the “emotion” represented by the smiley (e.g. sad, happy, hyper) - this also would probably what we would use as the “text to replace” for the smiley, e.g. “: sad :” for a sad smiley.[/list=1][/li]Send the e-mail from the address you used to register at the SDMB. This is to prevent non-posters from suggesting smilies. We only extend the privilege of suggesting a smiley to SDMB posters in good standing.
The size should be not more than 48 pixels (width) by 33 pixels (height) - the size of our “Wally” smiley.
No animated smilies please.
There is a limit of one smiley proposal per username, so be selective in your proposal! (Last time several people said there were too many choices in the poll, and I agree with them.)
How will the smilies be chosen?
First the staff will review the smilies and reject any that in their judgment do not meet the SDMB “community standards”. The proposals that make the cut will then be displayed on a web page, and we will have a poll in IMHO to determine which of those smilies to add to the MB. The polling process will use approval voting, the same method as used in the first smiley election.
If you would like to discuss the benefit smilies add to a message board - please post in the IMHO forum.
If you disagree with our method for choosing smilies and would like to propose a different method - please post in The BBQ Pit forum.
The submission period for the second SDMB smiley poll is starting now until 13 December 2002 24:00 (12 midnight - PST - California, USA), or until nine smilies are submitted and approved by the staff, whichever happens first.
Threads of interest (from the first smiley election)

Smiley Voting - Round 2

Results from Round 1

Round 1 - Poll 1

Round 1 - Poll 2

Round 1 - Poll 3

Round 1 - Poll 4

Round 1 - Poll 5

Asking for smiley submissions in ATMB

Practice poll in ATMB

IMHO thread debating the most useful smiley

IMHO thread discussing the voting method

Let the best smiley win!

I like smilies. :smack:

I’m not skilled at the necessary graphics, but I’d like to see, and use, a symbol that showed a pair of hands, palms forward, that means “kidding!”

I’d vote for that.

I’m resubmitting the smilie formerly titled "Ambivalent (#16 Poll 1 towards bottom of this screen) under the more apt name “Wry”.

If someone wants to locate or design a “barfy” and submit it, I’d be forever in your debt.

I’d like to see a crying smilie.

Yeah, a bit of an oxymoron there, but it’d still be nice to see.

I have a thought for the person who adapted Slug’s drawing of Cecil for a smiley. Would you consider doing a slightly different version that plainly expresses a skeptical or dubious attitude?

Those are all some good smilies at the last poll. :smack: was a good winner, but I would like to see some of those resubmitted.
Particularly the tinfoil hat and Cecil.

Who when where? How can a vote have too many choices? A more tightly restricted number of candidates is easier to manage for all of us, but do you just trust us to not clog up the submissions with a few hasty and unworthy proposals?

Last time half of the fun was watching the big submission page fill up, and discussing the variety of entries before the poll. Oh well, as long as you don’t declare a voter turnout of 100% and all of us voted for a cuckoo clock smiley.

Clever move. No one in their right mind would ‘waste’ a precious submission slot and their only opportunity on Smashie. :slight_smile:

Hey Arnold,

I want to resubmit my evil (grin) smilie. I’ll certainly shoot off the e-mail, but do you need a resubmission of the actualy smilie (mine’s the purple one in Poll #1, not the “devil” one)? I suspect you’re gonna be swamped and why resubmit if you already have it? Or do you? Either way.


I’m ignorant when it comes to the graphics and other applications necessary to “create” a smiley.
Perhaps someone with the skills could design a “frustrated, hamster’s ate my post smiley”.

Maybe have smiley pulling his hair out and mumbling the word hamster’s.

Damn. I want a cuckoo smiley now, thanks to femtosecond. :wink:

Not a cuckoo clock, but a some kind of smiley to represent a “this [thing/person/situation] is driving me [cuckoo/nuts/insane]”. I don’t know how to make smileys, so if anyone wants to run with that idea…

Not to hijack (heh. The hijack smiley), but how did the Jew smiley come about?

I sometimes like to use smileys. Is there any way that I could find out how to make a smiley while in the middle of posting. Actually, there is only one :slight_smile: (well maybe two :() but sometimes I want another.

Blackeyes, have a look through ATMB. There have been two threads on that topic in the last month or so.
I have a couple points to raise this time around.

First, although overall I think I’m a “no on smilies” voter, I agree with femtosecond. Will the nine-smiley limit be first-come-first-served? I’m sure there are at least nine from the last election that could garner some popular support for resubmission.

Second, there’s an improvement to the voting process that I think should be considered. It’s only really applicable if there are more than nine smilies submitted, though – I’m assuming that the cap at nine is intended to provide us with an end result of one poll with ten choices.

If, however, the decision is made to include more smilies, or for whatever reason there is more than one round of voting, I think there should be a “none” vote in each poll, even in the preliminary rounds. This will a) serve to express the opinion of the silent multitude of posters who, like me, do not support adding new smilies, and b) hopefully go some distance towards reducing the number of smilies that progress past the first round of voting, especially if many of the smilies in a particular first round poll are of a lower quality.

But I understand that the two-round process and all the bureaucracy associated with it was probably a huge headache for the staff in general, and Arnold Winkelried specifically, so if there can be some assurance to the Dopers that the nine finalists would be chosen justly and fairly, I think it’s best to go ahead with just the one poll.
Actually, though, I’d prefer it if the staff chose a bunch of crappy ones that nobody liked, so everyone would vote “no new smilies”.
On preview: Hari Seldon, I’m assuming you are using the ‘Quick Reply’ box exclusively. If you instead hit “reply” (or after you have previewed), a whole panel of smilies will come up for your use. Mousing over them (in most browsers) will tell you the text sequence needed to produce them in a post, or you can just click the one you want, which will not only insert it at the end of the post you are currently typing, it will also provide the same information for future use.

Yes, definitely a “barfy” smiley, or a “Disgusting!” or “Gross!” type smiley.

I also think there should be a flat-mouthed smiley like the “dissapointed smiley” on MSN messenger. It doesn’t look like a dissapointed face at all, it looks more like an “okay…didn’t need to know that!” smiley.

In the last poll, there was a “none” option in each preliminary. You vote it by just not checking off anything.

Blackeyes, In case you haven’t already found this:

White Lightning, Chronos, Voting for none of the choices, as voting for all of them, doesn’t change the outcome of the approval voting method. Pre-polls only determine the relative ranks within themselves and are completely separate until their results are combined. This is where compromises must be made: last time’s method didn’t even try to include only the (absolute) highest votes in the second poll. That didn’t matter because it was guaranteed to include from each pre-poll at least one of the best votes, from which in turn we only needed to definitely determine the top one.

A “none” option in each poll might improve the quality of the lower ranks in the final, but it also just might force us to include the second choice of another poll - we can’t leave one out until we know the absolute ranks. To avoid this, or to guarantee a completely fair vote between the lower ranks, we would have to use more polls or more rounds or an altogether different voting method.

Look at it this way: the “no new smileys” choice would be included in the final poll in any case - it doesn’t have to work its way up like other candidates and is already favored.

BTW, Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?

I liked the “Pedant” smiley, wearing a mortarboard, but if it’s submitted in the election this time I think it needs a new name. Nobody wants to vote for a pedant, but maybe with a name like “nerd” or “geek” it may garner more votes. I, however, am graphically inept, but do you still have it from the last election, Arnold?