Avatars, post counts, friends list, nested quotes, image tags, this, that, the other thing.
When SDMB initiates coding that electrocutes me every time I type the word “frenulum” or something, let me know. The rest is just wankery, if you ask me.
Look, I’ve given my reasons, both personal and for the sake of others, as to why I prefer not to have avatars on this board. Those reasons do not consist of “If I don’t want it, nobody should have it!” and/or “OMG!! This will ruin the board!”, despite the (over)reactions expressed in this and the other threads on this subject. I think I’ll step aside now and let others have their say on the matter, because according to the poll the voting isn’t as lopsided as these posts make them out to be.
Czarcasm’s posts read in a way that is consistent with knowing what’s best for everyone else, and close proximity of sand to the lady parts.
Czarcasm, maybe you should try reading your own posts for comprehension. Because your reasoning is exactly because I don’t want it nobody should have it. And the poll shows that 157 posters either want avatars or don’t care about them and 78 posters are dicks.
If you only want to hear one answer, create a poll with only one answer. I offered my opinion in this thread under the mistaken impression that it was actually being solicited. Instead, I’ve blundered into an ersatz pep rally for avatars whose proponents apparently take them very, *very *seriously, sending some extremely long stares toward the few chumps (like me) not waving a pom-pom.
I don’t know, I liked the burned-out car thing better than the pep rally thing. Can we have some more rusted out engine blocks?
Let’s walk through this (summarized content of statements):
RaftPeople: If turned off, how does that impact verbal discourse?
Czarcasm: Because seeing the image…
It’s hard to tell if you didn’t read my question, or if you did read it but by the time you decided to respond you had forgotten that “turned off” was part of the scenario.
I do sincerely appreciate the fact that you responded - but I am thoroughly confused at the complete lack of communication that just occurred.
Yep. “You guys are so hysterical I don’t need to address (or even acknowledge) your points”.
If you just wanted to do a drive-by opinion piece, why didn’t you do that? Why is it a problem that other people actually want to have a discussion?
It’s true that the poll was worded poorly. It probably should have just been the following question:
Can anyone identify a mechanism that could cause the visual presentation of the SDMB on someone else’s computer to impact one’s own SDMB experience?
For me personally I might have them turned on at times and I might have them turned off at other times - but when I have them turned off, I’m pretty damn sure I would not be impacted by the fact that some people may be seeing images on their computer. And the reason why is because I can’t see their computer. I also can’t tell if they post from a comfortable chair or not, or if the lighting is good or if their computer is slow. That information is not available to me unless I seek it out.
You are absolutely slaying me here. This is a hilarious, accurate, hilariously accurate assessment of the question being posed.
Oh come on. :rolleyes: Avatars aren’t inline graphics. They have nothing to do with the discourse really. I don’t know why you think avatars and verbal discourse are mutually exclusive. All they do is make it easier to remember identities. If anything, signatures have more of an impact of wasting space and being potentially distracting, but they are allowed.
If you really think identities somehow limit discourse (I think it makes discussion richer to be able to differentiate easily between the people you talk to over the long term) then you should propose that the SDMB get rid of all identifiers whatsoever, such that no posts are labeled with a name or even any ID of any kind. There will henceforth only be post numbers (for quoting and linking), and only mods will be able to see any poster IDs for the purpose of modding.
Ok. I’m going to take a stab at this as the devil’s advocate. Or let’s just keep it real and drop the euphemisms; the devil’s whore.
I think the anti-avvies treasure what they consider a certain…mood of this board. Like a club.
I know it is ‘cool’ to laugh at those that find the Dope smart or special or different than most of the net…but for some, I guess it feels that way.
When I first found the Dope, I didn’t have any other group of people I could ‘be around’ that I thought were all concentrated in one place so witty and funny and smart and fun. Maybe I’m just a dork and sucker and a fool for feeling that way, but for me, the feeling was real.
If folks still feel that way, then I can see how they kinda want to keep the environment as it is. They don’t want it to change, overall. They think that everyone else having avatars will change the atmosphere to the point where the wittiest and the funniest and the smartest are crowded out by the cat lovers and the cornballs and the childish, etc. They think the overall tone of the board will change. So it’s not about them seeing the avatars. It is about them feeling like they are in a certain kind of club when they may really be in a circus.
I would say to the anti-avvies that they are mistaken. It’s not going to be a circus. The same snobs and intellectuals and assholes and curmudgeons will still be here, stubbornly refusing any forms of goofy fun or avatars or silliness. I promise.
Huh. Looks to me like 153 people don’t care anything about having avatars while 99 just gotta have their Chocolate Frosted Sugar Bomby visual stimulus.
While I think you’re likely right, I’m afraid your “whoring” just makes me wonder when Starving Artist will stop using his mind-control rays.
ETA: Uh, not on you. You advocated worthily!
Damn good summarising / advocation 
Just to add, again, that one option for those that are concerned about a stampede of lolcats, is to not allow avatars to be uploaded. i.e. all you can do is choose a (tasteful) avatar e.g. like one of these
**Nzinga **makes a decent point. I’ve allied myself squarely in the “Who Gives A Shit” camp, but I admit if you put it to me to make the decision, I’d say, lets keep it as it is. On the other hand, it’s not like I’d put up a stink if we had avatars … shit, I’d probably snag one myself.
I liken it to the yearly referendum we have here in Maine to allow a casino to be built near the ski resorts. I always vote “no” just because a casino seems so un-Maine, but if it passes … I’ll still go play poker there.
Ick. That would seem to fall square into the category of “compromise that leaves everyone unhappy”. People still can’t upload avatars, but the non-avatar crowd know that there are pictures on the site anyway…
That last one looks mildly pornographic - although it’s probably just me. :eek:
Well, it’s not just you NOW. Thanks a lot!
Ditto js.