| This 32 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 32 ( 1  ) ||posting off |
|Allow Picture in Profile|
Might appear small but its very warm
Show Faces of Members!
Allow members to have a small picture of them in their profile which shows (if they want) when they post a message. It might not appear to be something big but it really really gives a feeling of more closely knit community. For example i love to interact with many old members here i even like to visit their sites but i never get to see how they look. If you know whom you are talking to, its much more comforting. I dont mean to say it will bring more users or it helps our "webmaster" theme, but yes it does help community alot. Take "Face" out of "FaceBook" and see what happens. Give Face to WebMasterWorld and again see what happens.
For example, few weeks ago Brett Replied to one of my threads for the first time ever. I have seen his pic it was so so nice to read that message even though it was just about a feature of the forum, But it really makes you want to interact on the forum more when you know the other person a little bit. I would love to see jatar_k, coopster, hawk_girl, Engine, Mack, many more and i am sure it would make me interact on the forum more and more. Maybe i cant put it in proper words but i feel it will have a huge impact on how this "World" develops now on.
Afterall we are all social animals, give a little bit "social" touch to this community. Birds will fly in, and Stay.
I would welcome some provision for photos or other avatars on our profile pages, along with other expanded information, but I would vote against displaying them with every post.
|You are making mountains out of a molehills |
With respect, I am merely responding to the demand "why not have avatars" with specific examples of drawbacks - what has been almost entirely missing from those in favour has been specific reasons to bother changing current policy.
It is for those who want change to show the benefits, and I continue to invite them to do so.
|when offered arguments for, you choose to ignore them |
The opening post argued that genuine photographs of members would increase community spirit - I don't disagree, but available evidence suggest that almost nobody will upload such an image (which cannot in any case be verified).
Other arguments have tended to be of the "because I want it" variety, with no explanation of how WebmasterWorld would benefit (but a fair amount of abuse, e.g. "tired old guys", "saddo", "desperate" etc).
One argument in favour included "most people don't even bother uploading avatars", which seems somewhat self-defeating. Another specifically mentioned using a copyrighted image, possibly unaware that copyright issues are regularly discussed here.
Only one person raised the possibility of increased membership, and modesty forbids me from naming him.
|Let's hope Brett is more amenable to argument without red herrings! |
I would imagine he will be looking for demonstrable positives, things that can be shown to make WebmasterWorld better at what it does.
I would also expect him to consider inter alia the following herrings:
* What are the financial implications in terms of bandwidth
* Would these (if significant) be outweighed by increased membership or other factors
* If allowed, what size and format should the avatars be
* Should animated gifs be allowed (as in many other forums)
* Should corporate logos or other advertising be allowed
* How will moderators know which images infringe copyright
* What constitutes an offensive image or slogan
* Will enough members upload images to make the exercise worthwhile
While unscientific, the data I provided on usage elsewhere suggests that the overwhelming majority of people who regularly post in forums are not interested in avatars.
Put another way, avatars are very much a minority interest, possibly appealing most to those with a strong need to draw attention to themselves.
Now excuse me while I look up the definition of "Saddo".
| This 32 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 32 ( 1  ) |