PDA

View Full Version : Would you like DBR to use Avatars?



DankeShane
02-27-2007, 07:58 AM
Just curious what the masses think about avatars. Personally, I like them. It puts a "face" on the posters and gives you a chance to personalize things a bit. Also as throaty mentioned in one of the other threads, sigs with pictures can get really ridiculous and unwieldy. What do you think?

throatybeard
02-27-2007, 08:05 AM
Yours beat mine by like 2 minutes, so I deleted mine.

But I had a third (middle) option: "they're cool as long as they're size-limited," which I would have chosen. But I voted yes on your poll.

DankeShane
02-27-2007, 08:08 AM
Yours beat mine by like 2 minutes, so I deleted mine.

But I had a third (middle) option: "they're cool as long as they're size-limited," which I would have chosen. But I voted yes on your poll.

Yeah, I think I stole your idea when I read your other post suggesting the poll. I agree on size limitations, though (as long as they can still be animated).

feldspar
02-27-2007, 08:09 AM
An interesting note that influenced my vote: in the options section, you can choose to have avatars turned off.

In other words, if you don't like them, you don't have to see them, but it still allows others like throatybeard the privilege of having one.

rthomas
02-27-2007, 08:12 AM
What is the argument against them?

DukeUsul
02-27-2007, 08:13 AM
I typically think avatars are fine, but if the guys are trying to limit their bandwidth usage to save some $$, I'm ok with leaving them out.

feldspar
02-27-2007, 08:14 AM
What is the argument against them?

Personally, I find that they clutter up the board and aren't really necessary. We've survived for very very long without them.

But then again, like I said, I can turn them off no problem. If others want to use them, I've got no problem with it, I would just like to see DBR make an effort to keep them classy. Go to some of the other ACC forums and you'll know what I'm talking about. This isn't a WWF forum.

feldspar
02-27-2007, 08:14 AM
I typically think avatars are fine, but if the guys are trying to limit their bandwidth usage to save some $$, I'm ok with leaving them out.

That's a great point I hadn't considered.

DankeShane
02-27-2007, 08:15 AM
An interesting note that influenced my vote: in the options section, you can choose to have avatars turned off.

In other words, if you don't like them, you don't have to see them, but it still allows others like throatybeard the privilege of having one.

That's a good point. Also, there are firefox extensions that work explicitly with vbulletin that allow you the option of removing all avatars, sigs, etc (never tried it, don't know how well it works...) so you could certainly customize your viewing experience.

throatybeard
02-27-2007, 08:18 AM
DukeUSUL's point is good, I echo Feldspar echoing that.

Otherwise, if you can turn them off in your view of the board I don't see why not have them. I can only speak for myself, but I get a lot of silly little pleasure out of changing my avatar at The Devil's Den every few months.

feldspar
02-27-2007, 08:18 AM
I get a lot of silly little pleasure out of changing my avatar at The Devil's Den every few months.

Or being lazy and not having one in other places ;)

Richard Berg
02-27-2007, 08:28 AM
Yes, as long as:
(a) there are rules on how often you can change them. (on some forums people change them like tshirts, gives no help whatsoever)
(b) no animations!

throatybeard
02-27-2007, 08:31 AM
It's worth pointing out that no animations would put BluBones out of business.

DukeDevilsBB
02-27-2007, 08:43 AM
Otherwise, if you can turn them off in your view of the board I don't see why not have them. I can only speak for myself, but I get a lot of silly little pleasure out of changing my avatar at The Devil's Den every few months.


I agree with throaty, avatars are fun and those who disagree can turn them off.

DankeShane
02-27-2007, 08:44 AM
And Stray's chomping gator-head (if it were in the avatar, that is)

BluBones
02-27-2007, 08:49 AM
It's worth pointing out that no animations would put BluBones out of business.

Ahem. It's true. I'm clearly pro-avatar, if only b/c I've been using my little bony-boy on DBR since the juliovision days. It's useful. I can post on BBS's where I haven't been active for years (like, um, DBR) and be remembered. I'd also hate to lose StrayGator's classic ani, which has been around longer than mine.

Nevertheless, I've been on boards where the animations are a terrible distraction. On the old DBR BBS this was less of an issue b/c one viewed one post at a time instead of the entire thread. If everyone starts using animated avatars here the threads might take on the look of a string of Christmas tree lights. I suggest we wait and see. We DBR folks are a reserved, cultivated bunch. It may not become a problem. However, if the community votes that things are getting out of hand, I'll suspend Mr. Bones for the good of the site.

Stray Gator
02-27-2007, 10:22 AM
I'm in favor of allowing non-animated avatars, subject to reasonable restrictions for size and content. I'd still use the animated chomping gator as my sig, of course. :D

Stray ~~~;~~~;~http://mudlizard.com/users/icons/emoticons/chomp.gif

Chard
02-27-2007, 10:23 AM
As long as I don't have to be distracted by big bouncy breasts I'm okay with avatars. I'm trying to read here, people!

throatybeard
02-27-2007, 10:55 AM
As long as I don't have to be distracted by big bouncy breasts I'm okay with avatars. I'm trying to read here, people!

The above, yeah, that's why I was thinking of the Wake Forest board.

mapei
02-27-2007, 11:00 AM
I like size-limited avatars, but would prefer no animation and no large type in signatures - annoyingly distracting, plus it calls attention to the screen when I'm reading at work.

gadzooks
02-27-2007, 11:02 AM
But I had a third (middle) option: "they're cool as long as they're size-limited," which I would have chosen. But I voted yes on your poll.Same here. I'm not opposed to them, but would definitely be in favor of limiting the size, and disallowing or strictly limiting images in sigs. I belong to a couple other boards where it's frequently hard to find the post amongst all the stuff.

bluebutton
02-27-2007, 03:41 PM
I voted no before realizing I could turn off the avatars per my own preference. I think I really should have voted, "No I won't use that feature". As long as I can experience the boards as sleek, easy to navigate and skim, I'll be happy. I like the gator and blue bones but wouldn't want too many more.

The thought that avatars might increase the cost to B&J would make me lean against them generally since we did well without them for years. However, I don't know if there actually is a cost.

OZZIE4DUKE
02-27-2007, 03:54 PM
I like size-limited avatars, but would prefer no animation and no large type in signatures - annoyingly distracting, plus it calls attention to the screen when I'm reading at work.

I beg to differ about the large type. Sometimes, it is just plain necessary!

mapei
02-27-2007, 04:03 PM
I wish I could make an exception in your case, Ozzie, but it really does annoy me! Love your content, though.

DankeShane
02-28-2007, 09:36 AM
Anyone stragglers out there still want to vote?

throatybeard
02-28-2007, 10:09 AM
That poll went weird. It was close early, lopsided for midway thru, and then against closed the gap. But I like it.

Another point I didn't make earlier is that avatars let people get their attach-an-image-to-myself Jones outside the sig. It's off to the side in an area that already has stuff in it, like a post count and a screen name.

DankeShane
02-28-2007, 10:18 AM
Yeah that struck me as odd as well. The "yes" vote was running away with it for most of the day yesterday, at more than 2 to 1. Now it's a bit closer, but I think a lot of the "no"s didn't realize you can just turn 'em off if.

alteran
02-28-2007, 10:27 AM
I thought I'd weigh in since my objection to avatars in another thread may have triggered this discussion.

My primary objection to avatars is content. If you don't know what I'm talking about, look at some of the many sites that allow essentially unrestricted avatars and I think you'll get it pretty quickly. I do think they can add to a site somewhat, but the minusses always outweigh the plusses.

Minor issues: they detract from the site's aesthetics-- you've got people mixing grainy photos, stick figure drawings, and cartoons. They eat more bandwidth than the actual messages. And when they're animated (and they will be), then they're the message board equivalent of pop-up advertising.

But my primary complaint is the content.

But since it turns out I can turn the [expletive deleted] things off, it's not really that big a deal for me anymore.

pratt '04
02-28-2007, 10:40 AM
but would prefer no animation and no large type in signatures - annoyingly distracting, plus it calls attention to the screen when I'm reading at work.

You can turn off signatures in your preferences as well.

Cavlaw
02-28-2007, 10:45 AM
You can turn off signatures in your preferences as well.
I've done that on a few of the sites I frequent where the messages are few and far between, scattered among the absurd signatures.

I voted yes back at the beginning based on the question describing avatars as "those little pictures next to your name" like Throaty demo'd above (you should also be able to animate there".

I would immediately turn off sigs as soon as large (and certainly multiple) images started showing up in them. I suspect most people would, too, in which case the signature feature becomes largely useless, anyways.

throatybeard
02-28-2007, 10:46 AM
These are limited 80x80 pixels.

BoC
02-28-2007, 11:22 AM
I also voted 'yes', and as has been mentioned already, a size limit (file size included) would be a good idea. Another site I'm a member of has a size limit of 125X125px and a file size limit of 60kb, which still allows for some neat animations, but nothing outrageous. That site, like this one, has taste restrictions, too.

And for those who don't mind avatars but would rather not see the animations, I believe hitting the 'esc' key stops all that sort of thing; I do it all the time to stop blinking banners and what not.

DukeDevilsBB
02-28-2007, 11:47 AM
so how do we set them up? or can we even do it yet?

DukeDevilsBB
02-28-2007, 11:51 AM
no message

mjones723
02-28-2007, 04:18 PM
I'm all for avatars.

IndyBoilerDevil
02-28-2007, 04:51 PM
Avatars are always a good thing. Especially on vBulletin, it handles them perfectly.

I like sigs with pictures too, but only to a certain extent. A good site that displays the best of vBulletin's features is www.coltfreaks.com check it out sometime.