Adding Avatars to LQ

Chargh · 03-15-2007, 03:09 PM

I would suggest that LQ give the ability to allow members to have avatars. I would also suggest A size limit of 100x100 pixels so there are not huge avatars that bug people with small screens.

rshaw · 03-15-2007, 03:16 PM

heh, it's been awhile since this has come up

this should be fun to watch.

XavierP · 03-15-2007, 03:18 PM

https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...hlight=avatars - not even for mods!
https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...hlight=avatars
https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...hlight=avatars
https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...hlight=avatars
https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...hlight=avatars

This is a question that is almost as old as the site itself, and the answer has never changed since I've been a member.

XavierP · 03-15-2007, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rshaw

heh, it's been awhile since this has come up

this should be fun to watch.

I was going to do a new thread for this, but why does Gentoo not have a forum here? [/preemptive strike]

Chargh · 03-15-2007, 04:07 PM

I do not see what is wrong with Avatars. As long as there are rules on size and obscenity it would be fine. It could also be helpful to identify members that you know are helpful. It is currently really Difficult to differentiate members from each other. This would make the forum more useful and helpful.

Also if so many people have posted about Avatars it means many people want them.

jeremy · 03-15-2007, 04:22 PM

For every person that's posted asking about them, many more have thanked us for not allowing them. Avatars are just something you won't see at LQ. Sorry.

--jeremy

Chargh · 03-15-2007, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy

For every person that's posted asking about them, many more have thanked us for not allowing them. Avatars are just something you won't see at LQ. Sorry.
--jeremy

Lets end this and make a poll. That poll will make the final decision.

jeremy · 03-15-2007, 04:35 PM

A final decision has already been made.

--jeremy

XavierP · 03-15-2007, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chargh

Lets end this and make a poll. That poll will make the final decision.

Heh - joke post I hope. The owner and benevolent fatherly dictator of the site says no (all hail Commandant Garcia!) and you demand a poll to have the final say? Heh.

pixellany · 03-15-2007, 08:59 PM

Does the old metaphor "swimming upstream" mean anything to you?
May I suggest more constructive causes......
May I also suggest that **I** do something more constructive.....

custangro · 03-15-2007, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy

For every person that's posted asking about them, many more have thanked us for not allowing them. Avatars are just something you won't see at LQ. Sorry.

--jeremy

Thank You!

I hate avatars. It takes away from what the forum is about...The no avatar thing is why I LOVE this site (not to mention that I can disscuss Linux!

)

jeremy · 03-16-2007, 08:52 AM

Just to make it clear - I'm up for debate on almost any topic and I think you'll find LQ more receptive to feedback than most sites. We thrive on it, in fact. This topic, however, has been debated before (thanks for the links Ray

) and avatars just aren't something you'll see here.

--jeremy

pixellany · 03-16-2007, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy

and avatars just aren't something you'll see here.

--jeremy

I can just see Edith Ann (the Lily Tomlin character on Laugh-In) saying "And that's the truth"---followed by a marvelous baby noise--something like pffllffllffllffllff...

What???--not everyone here can remember Laugh In......

IBall · 03-16-2007, 01:29 PM

One reason I like LQ having No Avatars is that I can safely look at this site at work during my lunch break.

The last thing I need is for my boss to be walking past, and see an inappropriate picture as someone's avatar...

I think not having Avatars make this site look much more professional and credible.

--Ian

DragonSlayer48DX · 03-16-2007, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chargh

I do not see what is wrong with Avatars. As long as there are rules on size and obscenity it would be fine. It could also be helpful to identify members that you know are helpful. It is currently really Difficult to differentiate members from each other. This would make the forum more useful and helpful.

Also if so many people have posted about Avatars it means many people want them.

I agree that avatars would be nice, and in some ways, useful... IF everyone followed the rules. However, I see the reasoning behind not allowing them...

With more than a quarter-million members and only a handful of mods, that would be quite a bit of work censoring avatars; nobody would have time for anything else. If you visit Yahoo Member Photos, Flickr, or Webshots frequently, you'll see they're overwhelmed by users who think it's cool to constantly agitate the censors by posting and reposting objectionable content, or just like to see how long it will remain posted before it's found and removed.

So then, what would be a viable recourse, disbarring members who are knowledgeable and helpful, but have an eye for porn and like tormenting the mods?

It's just easier and more productive to not allow avatars.

Cheers
Bill