homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.196.195.207
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld Feedback Forums / WebmasterWorld Feedback Days
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: brett tabke

WebmasterWorld Feedback Days Forum

This 72 message thread spans 3 pages: 72 ( [1] 2 3 > >   posting off  
What about adding member profile pictures?
Like Facebook or Twitter?
LifeinAsia




msg:4138490
 3:21 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Personally, I don't like them very much. In some places (gaming sites, Facebook, etc.), I can see it. But on a professional site, like Webmaster World, I think it's distracting and makes things look less professional.

Plus there's the issue of people using copyrighted images.

Allowing an avatar or other picture on the user profile page? That I wouldn't mind seeing. But the same image next to each post? No, I am not for that.

 

piatkow




msg:4138498
 3:24 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

I don't think that they add value. They look unprofessional and nibble away at bandwidth. The latter is no problem on my fixed connection but it gets eaten up very quickly on my limited mobile contract.

bwnbwn




msg:4138503
 3:27 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Please don't I was a memeber of another board before moving over here years ago and it was just that adding avatars. Turned in a circus and I was outta there.

StoutFiles




msg:4138504
 3:28 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Bandwidth/speed problems. Site promotion problems. Professional environment problems. I don't suggest it.

However, a Level Up system would be fun...more titles than just Senior Member.

OrganicPop




msg:4138525
 3:38 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

I like the streamlined look, say no to avatars

Demaestro




msg:4138526
 3:41 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

I vote nay on avatars.

I turn them off if given the option to speed up the page anyway.

Edwin




msg:4138536
 3:46 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

No from me. Love the unclutter compared to the average forum!

phranque




msg:4138541
 3:48 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

maybe profile only avatars.
not in threads.

Brett_Tabke




msg:4138558
 3:53 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

what if they were optional? If you upload a picture and enable it, then you see everyone elses?

Mark_A




msg:4138566
 3:56 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

I hate avatars - this is not second life FFS ! it is relatively serious subject matter.

This is a vote for "No Avatars"

pageoneresults




msg:4138570
 3:57 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

what if they were optional? If yours is turned on, then you see everyone elses?


Optional would be a good way to approach it. You'll definitely need lots of checks and balances in place during the upload routines. Folks will quickly upload a 500k avatar and not think twice about it. Keep them small both dimension and byte size and I think it would be doable. Avatars off by default though.

I'd definitely consider bandwidth challenges in this instance. If you keep the initial avatar specifications lean and mean, it would still have an impact but not nearly as bad as it could be.

incrediBILL




msg:4138571
 3:57 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

I think avatars could be interesting as long as they are opt-in to view.

Uploading shouldn't trigger them, then noobs couldn't seen them, make it a setting in the control panel.

phranque




msg:4138573
 3:59 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

what if they were optional? If you upload a picture and enable it, then you see everyone elses?

as long as there is a "no discussion of avatars" rule to prevent an "us vs them" wall.
=8)

grelmar




msg:4138574
 3:59 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Please no Avatars. The sparse design of WebmasterWorld is what helps keep the eye on the prize, so to speak. The prize being the content and high value conversations.

LifeinAsia




msg:4138580
 4:02 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Another issue- from a formatting standpoint, an avatar would take up a lot of real estate.

what if they were optional? If you upload a picture and enable it, then you see everyone elses?

It sounds like a possible compromise, if there were a lot of people who wanted them. The "no" side seems pretty vocal, so no matter what, some way to turn them off would definitely be required.

freejung




msg:4138596
 4:08 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

My question is, how would avatars add value to the site? A big part of the reason we're here is that we don't feel we need bells and whistles, we just want good discussions. We're used to recognizing people by their names.

I wouldn't be opposed to avatars necessarily, I don't think it would hurt anything, but why spend development time and screen space on something that doesn't really add any value?

lammert




msg:4138601
 4:11 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

I vote no to Avatars.

It doesn't add value to discussions, costs extra bandwidth on the client and server side (I am often on GPRS where every bit counts) and could be misused by clever forum spammers to promote their brand.

If Avatars would be allowed, then only via opt-in per user in the control panel as incrediBILL suggested.

Webwork




msg:4138602
 4:12 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

To me, the value of WebmasterWorld is in the verbiage, well reseached, reasoned and expressed.

Everything else - including avatars, sig lines, sig links, etc. - is, to me (for the most part), the stuff of mommy-look-at-me, ego-spawned, pseudo-self-expressive, fru-fruish, vapid, feckless forum dunnage, drivel and/or dreck.

No strong feelings here . . Noooooo . . Love this stuff like I love Brussels sprouts . . :P.

[edited by: Webwork at 4:23 pm (utc) on May 25, 2010]

Shaddows




msg:4138603
 4:12 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

As long as I can easily avoid them, I see no reason for others not to have them.

Except for gobbling the bandwidth from others, most of whom seem happy without.

What do they accomplish anyway, apart from risking the promotion or denegration of brands- especially as many mods/admin will opt out? Eroding brand-free space seems a big price to pay for a minority interest

idolw




msg:4138607
 4:12 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Avators do not add value and make the site slower.

le_gber




msg:4138640
 4:29 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

+1 with what Brett said - if you have one uploaded you see the others, if not, you can choose to see them or not.

Otherwise I'd say no - the design is a lot cleaner without.

TheMadScientist




msg:4138647
 4:32 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

What Webwork said x 2

No Avatars.

brotherhood of LAN




msg:4138649
 4:32 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

I wouldn't want to see them. Optional sounds good.

I'd disagree less with people actually posting photos of themselves. Some people find it more easily to remember people by face than name... having the option to turn them on/off for bandwidth purposes would be good in any event.

pageoneresults




msg:4138679
 4:48 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

If you do decide to allow Avatars, there is of course an SEO benefit to this. If everything is done properly, semantically, etc., those Avatars can pull rank in Image Search. I know, I've performed experiments with this and have a few Avatars in a number one spot based on name searches. Just ask @rishil on Twitter. :)

I'd like the option to name the file path of my avatar image using either my username or my real name, one or the other.

Kelowna




msg:4138699
 4:58 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

it's distracting and makes things look less professional.


I agree, let the kids play games somewhere else.

Alcoholico




msg:4138765
 5:22 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Definitively NOT. What TheMadScientist said x 3

tangor




msg:4138778
 5:26 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Not me, please! (I'd have to post a really ugly pic of me!)

Seriously, keep it neat and clean. There is something special about the minimalist look of WW. And if it ain't broke, why fix it?

ken_b




msg:4138802
 5:33 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

The left hand (member info) column is already about 15 lines long.

Adding an avatar would make it even longer!

Look a the number of posts that dont fill the default height of the message space now. Why make that worse?

akmac




msg:4138809
 5:35 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

Another NO vote on Avatars. Very limited gain (if any) with more admin headaches and bandwidth gobbling. Keep it clean and fast.

JoaoJose




msg:4138832
 5:49 pm on May 25, 2010 (gmt 0)

No avatars. yuck

This 72 message thread spans 3 pages: 72 ( [1] 2 3 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld Feedback Forums / WebmasterWorld Feedback Days
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved