To Avatar or Not to Avatar?

User Attraction or Risky Gimmick?

[rogerd]

Quite a few forum software packages allow avatars, the little pictures that a user can choose to represent himself/herself. I've got a site with an active forum that has mostly college-age users, who would no doubt enjoy that kind of feature.

I have reservations, though. If I use a "library" of preset avatars, people will get bored, choose the same ones as other users, complain that there's nothing appropriate for them, etc. If I allow user uploads, it seems like I run the risk of inappropriate images as well as hacker exploits. If I allow uploads only by admins/mods, I create a bottleneck and workload increase.

In looking at webmaster-oriented fora, it seems that some use avatars and others don't. The fact that the best and highest-traffic webmaster forum doesn't use avatars is certainly telling, though.

I'm curious as to the experience of other forum operators - have you found user graphics to be a plus or a problem?

[GaryK]

On a site dedicated to professional topics I think avatars are inappropriate.

However on some sites, like hobbies, personal avatars are highly prized.

IMO the key to not getting burned by security issues is to write your own code. Make sure to validate for size, dimensions, and most important, that the file is actually what it claims to be. If it's not really a GIF or a JPG then disallow it.

As for problems with avatar content, either put the avatars into a queue for approval or trust your users and make it clear in the TOS that any inappropriate avatar will result in the user's membership being canceled.

This has worked well for me on a hobby site since May 1999 without a single hacker problem. There have been some inappropriate avatar content but hey, it's an imperfect world.

[korkus2000]

I believe part of the reason there are no avatars at WebmasterWorld is because it doesn't look professional. If I had a cartoon cow next to my name people would not take this place as serious as they do. There is also a copyright issue. The board would be liable for copyright pictures uploaded and hosted by the site.

It is a gimmick but it could enhance your forum for your users. I think it all depends on if the forum users would find it a nice feature or not.

[rcjordan]

Probably the best solution would be to provide a preference to the member and let him select whether to view avatars and emoticons. I think you'll find that even the most seasoned regular members get tired of the noise.

This board, for instance (somewhere -can't find it now), allows me to only see emoticons as ascii. (Heh! That feature is known as "rcjordan mode.")

[iraszl]

i personally think having an avatar is cool and useful. cool because the forums are about self expression and avatars add to it. useful because forums have usually many users and it's easier to get to know them if you see the same "cartoon cow" together with the name of the guy who posts. i don't think there is a relation between the availability of avatars and professionalism. it adds to all kinds of forum.

i think the best way to do it is to let people link their avatars to their messages. basically you allow them to create their little picts and give the url to their image in the control panel of their identity. so every time they post the image will load from their own server. you don't need server space and users are in control. what people usually do for fun if they don't have their own avatars created is that the url provided is a link to a picture available somewhere on the internet and your code will automatically scale it to the space dedicated to avatars. this results in some wierd imagery, but it's certainly entertaining.

check out http://www.macminute.com/cafe for a bright example

[WibbleWobble]

I can't stand Avatars. I'm on a forum because I want to read the pretty words, not view sporadic strobing animé gifs.
I think I'm amongst the minority, though, and I do consider online forums to be an extension of Usenet, so all text and no pictures seems like bliss. An infrequent bliss, albeit.

My two pence.

[rogerd]

Wow, those Mac people really communicate in pictures, don't they? ;)

I'd worry even more about links to external avatar graphics. It may cut down on your bandwidth, but really leaves the door open for abuse, broken image links, etc.

[mivox]

If you were going to do avatars at all, I'd second the suggestion of having uploads be scanned and go into a queue for approval before they can be used.

Personally, I don't see the need... but I don't find little avatars nearly as obnoxious as people who include giant animated gifs in their signature on every single message. hehehe. Blocking images/html from the body of posts is much more important than the avatar issue, IMO. ;)

[rogerd]

I agree, mivox, I'd never open the message body up to image posting or linking. Heck, a forum could start looking like that mac thing mentioned above, which seems to feature the exact behavior you object to! I've always felt that avatars looked a little unprofessional, but I have to remind myself that I'm not the target audience - the participants might think they were cool and fun.

[andreasfriedrich]

This board, for instance (somewhere -can't find it now), allows me to only see emoticons as ascii.

[webmasterworld.com...]

Shame on you rcjordan, you ought to know these things as an admin ;)

Andreas

[DrCool]

When it comes to forums I think the simpler the better. No avatars, no sig files, no pictures in posts, etc. Basically what you see here is what I like.

[KakenBetaal]

I think it depends on the kind of people you've targetted your forum at. I personally like the professional approach here at WebmasterWorld, but I run an inline skating forum, and for those members the use of avatars is almost a prerequisite.

I have around 500 members atm, not much, but out of all of those, only one has ever had to be asked to change his avatar because it was annoyingly flashy.