TalkBoard Topics - Motion Passed: Turn On Images in All Forums

Moved by RichMSN and seconded by kokonutz:

"The TalkBoard recommends that images be turned on for all current and new forums on FT."

This vote will close on March 20, 2012, at 12:35pm or after all TalkBoard members have registered their vote, whichever comes first

Per the TalkBoard Guidelines:

A motion shall pass if at least two-thirds of the yes or no votes cast by TalkBoard members are ‘yes’ and a majority of the total TalkBoard membership votes 'yes.'

The purpose of posting voting topics in the public TalkBoard Topics forum is to solicit member feedback on any motions that are up for a vote and to allow for comments after a vote is made. It is at the sole discretion of the individual TalkBoard members whether they choose to post in the public discussion thread, there being no requirement to do so.

So while there is already a thread and discussion on this general topic and it is safe to assume that TalkBoard members have reviewed that thread, this thread is about this specific motion.

Please feel free to post questions, comments or any other sort of feedback in this thread, or in the other discussion thread(s).

IMHO go ahead and flip the switch. ^

picture pages, picture pages, gotta have my picture pages....

um, yes I support this motion :cool:

Um, yes. Is this a controversial issue???

Um, yes. Is this a controversial issue???

Getting "turned on" could be. ;)

IMHO go ahead and flip the switch. ^

I agree. I would love to see it. You can post the picture anytime if you want.

I'm for pics, though thumbnails are the best option for this FTer, if it is an option.

Not sure I would want to look at pics in the Omni forums though.:eek:

I'm for pics, though thumbnails are the best option for this FTer, if it is an option.

Not sure I would want to look at pics in the Omni forums though.:eek:

You're too late for that, as it was decided on June 6, 2011, to allow images in OMNI and OMNI P/R. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/1218546-motion-passed-allow-images-omni-omni-p-r.html

That said, are images allowed in OMNI Games, since the motion was specific to OMNI and OMNI P/R, as the Games forum didn't exist at that time?

Given that most every forum already allows pictures, it makes sense to go ahead and be consistent across all the forums.

That said, are images allowed in OMNI Games, since the motion was specific to OMNI and OMNI P/R, as the Games forum didn't exist at that time?

I guess at this time they might not be, but this current motion will certainly take care of it if they're not.

I guess at this time they might not be, but this current motion will certainly take care of it if they're not.

True, but I was curious as to if images had been turned on for OMNI Games when it was created.

True, but I was curious as to if images had been turned on for OMNI Games when it was created.


Apparently they are on:

You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Apparently they are on:

Thanks. I have to wonder if that's an "oops," since I don't think it was ever discussed, but I don't think it'll matter.

I am in favor.

Thanks. I have to wonder if that's an "oops," since I don't think it was ever discussed, but I don't think it'll matter.
IMHO, it should matter in principle, let it be "oops" or not.

But in reality, there's so much "oops" going on between splitting out OMNI/Games and post counts. This "turn-on-oops" just went under the radar. This current motion, however, will take care of that unnoticed oops.

Is the forum capable of handling NFSW tags on threads or something else similar to that? Loading links instead of images keeps me (and many others I'm guessing) from worrying about images accidentally being picked up by my IT department.

NSFW pics should never be allowed.

The pics should also be reflective of the thread. Not these annoying "can i haz" pictures in the middle of an Elite Benefits thread.

To use an often-quoted line: this site is useless without pics. :) Well, that's a bit harsh and not really true, but rather, this site can be enhanced with pics. Thanks TB for considering this actual enhancement/development. It really IS a change I will like.

I'm for pics, though thumbnails are the best option for this FTer, if it is an option.
I, too, am a fan of thumbnails that can be expanded by clicking on them. If this is not an option, I'd rather have regular pictures than no pictures at all.

Is the forum capable of handling NFSW tags on threads or something else similar to that? Loading links instead of images keeps me (and many others I'm guessing) from worrying about images accidentally being picked up by my IT department.

* I don't think so.

NSFW pics should never be allowed.

The pics should also be reflective of the thread.

Well if something is quite explicit or beyond the pale, I'm sure that RBP will work or contacting the moderator (if a moderator hasn't caught it already).

One hopes that pics posted would be reflective of the thread.

Cheers.

Well if something is quite explicit or beyond the pale, I'm sure that RBP will work or contacting the moderator (if a moderator hasn't caught it already).

One hopes that pics posted would be reflective of the thread.

Of couse the inappropriate image could be up for quite some time before a moderator either catches it or gets to review the RBP.

That was my main objection originally (and remain so).

I'm not sure what benefits images can add to GLBT - appropriate images in a thread probably means the thread/discussion is more appropriate for one of the Destinations forums anyways.

You're too late for that, as it was decided on June 6, 2011, to allow images in OMNI and OMNI P/R. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/1218546-motion-passed-allow-images-omni-omni-p-r.html



Just goes to show you how much time I spend in OMNI!;)

Just goes to show you how much time I spend in OMNI!;)

:) There are a lot of threads in OMNI that don't have images.

:) There are a lot of threads in OMNI that don't have images.

Right, They don't have one in OMNI & OMNI/PR. This should have it. They will consider it.

No idea if this point has been raised before. I am based in Australia, and it just takes forever to load your pages (without photos!). No, its not my browser or my speeds, just the flyertalk forum takes ages to load - also have many loading failures (ie going from page 1 to page 2 in a thread).

Yes I am rurally based, so not lightning fast internet, but have no problems with other sites. Just a very small squeek, if you get a great person to enable photos etc, could they first check the 'clunkiness' of your server setup? Because for me personally, if you add images, surely the speed will slow down due to larger downloads?

Apologise if I appear an idiot, am a granny after all - and open to be corrected.

Right, They don't have one in OMNI & OMNI/PR. This should have it. They will consider it.

They do allow images in OMNI and OMNI P/R.

Of couse the inappropriate image could be up for quite some time before a moderator either catches it or gets to review the RBP.

That was my main objection originally (and remain so).

I'm not sure what benefits images can add to GLBT - appropriate images in a thread probably means the thread/discussion is more appropriate for one of the Destinations forums anyways.

I don't understand the logic behind the concern that GLBT travellers, "Disability" travellers, women travellers or religious travellers might somehow deign to post inappropriate content any more than a BAEC forum member for example.

I especially don't understand why the GLBT moderator would presume that.

Thanks RichMSN for proposing this motion for it was I that wanted to post a completely appropriate image in the GLBT forum last week and contacted talkboard when I realised that I couldn't.

I support this motion.

I don't understand the logic behind the concern that GLBT travellers, "Disability" travellers, women travellers or religious travellers might somehow deign to post inappropriate content any more than a BAEC forum member for example.

I especially don't understand why the GLBT moderator would presume that.

Thanks RichMSN for proposing this motion for it was I that wanted to post a completely appropriate image in the GLBT forum last week and contacted talkboard when I realised that I couldn't.

It's not a presumption - when past history indicates that we've (in GLBT) had to edit out 1/3-1/2 of links posted in the forum since they lead to sites which contain inappropriate images. There is no reason to think that the ratio for images will be drastically different.

It's not a presumption - when past history indicates that we've (in GLBT) had to edit out 1/3-1/2 of links posted in the forum since they lead to sites which contain inappropriate images. There is no reason to think that the ratio for images will be drastically different.
wow. so i guess GLBT should be the one forum that is an exception?

but there is no reason to have all other special interest forums as exception as they are now just because of that one forum.

It's not a presumption - when past history indicates that we've (in GLBT) had to edit out 1/3-1/2 of links posted in the forum since they lead to sites which contain inappropriate images. There is no reason to think that the ratio for images will be drastically different.

That's obviously a game changer, I just swung by the GLBT forum and wanted to post an on-topic image relating to GLBT travel. I felt it appeared somewhat discriminatory to not permit the posting of images in the GLBT forum. I couldn't think of any other logical reason for not allowing images, I actually thought "surely it is an oversight"

Now if a GLBT mod is questioning his own forum members' ability to resist posting inappropriate content on FT, then that so far as I can see is a perfect reason to prohibit images in GLBT as being a mod is a thankless task at the best of times and it would be peteropny and not I that would have to be wasting my time cleaning up.

That's obviously a game changer, I just swung by the GLBT forum and wanted to post an on-topic image relating to GLBT travel. I felt it appeared somewhat discriminatory to not permit the posting of images in the GLBT forum. I couldn't think of any other logical reason for not allowing images, I actually thought "surely it is an oversight"

Now if a GLBT mod is questioning his own forum members' ability to resist posting inappropriate content on FT, then that so far as I can see is a perfect reason to prohibit images in GLBT as being a mod is a thankless task at the best of times and it would be peteropny and not I that would have to be wasting my time cleaning up.

It's really not a game changer as far as I'm concerned.

Individual moderators, IMO, really shouldn't be able to set policies like this for individual forums. If inappropriate images are posted, there are other means of moderating (removing images, removing posters) than shutting it down entirely. Or there can be more moderators added.

I also support this.

It's really not a game changer as far as I'm concerned.

Individual moderators, IMO, really shouldn't be able to set policies like this for individual forums. If inappropriate images are posted, there are other means of moderating (removing images, removing posters) than shutting it down entirely. Or there can be more moderators added.

The policy was not set by individual moderators - it was agreed to by Randy & the then TB based upon concerns that I raised at the time.

The concern here is not so much having to remove images (and other disciplinary actions) but there are times when mods (even if there are "a lot" assigned to a forum) aren't online very much for a period of time and are not able to quickly remove an inappropriate image.

Lately, TB has a tendency to make issues out of things that are not really concerns of general members. An example is the issue of merging / mega-threads - http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/1294399-megathreads-your-thoughts.html . We, Hyatt mods, have been a bit concerned with the issue that some of the Master Hotel Review Threads had become too lengthy. We came up with a possible solution to split the threads - however, as can be seen at http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/hyatt-gold-passport/1301557-please-read-proposed-changes-hotel-review-threads-hyatt-poll-added-vote.html the members overwhelmingly voted to keep the threads as is - contrary to the discussion in TB in particular.

+1 to turning on images in ALL forums.

I'm confused - which forums don't allow images? Also, I posted images that used to post as images, and now only show the link: in the Religious Traveler forums. Is this connected?

I posted images that used to post as images, and now only show the link: in the Religious Traveler forums. Is this connected?

Yes.

Religious Travelers Forum is part of Special Interest Travel Forum (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/special-interest-travel-618/). Disability Travel, GLBT Travelers, Group and Event Travel Planning, Travel Health and Fitness, Travel with Children, Travel with Pets & Women Travelers all share the same fate as Religious Travelers Forum since 2009:

Moved by kokonutz and seconded by Spiff

that images be allowed in all Miles and Points forums, Travel&Dining forums, Technical Services forums as well as all Community forums except the Special Interest travel forums.

Yes.

Religious Travelers Forum is part of Special Interest Travel Forum (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/special-interest-travel-618/). Disability Travel, GLBT Travelers, Group and Event Travel Planning, Travel Health and Fitness, Travel with Children, Travel with Pets & Women Travelers all share the same fate as Religious Travelers Forum since 2009:
What was the rationale for banning images from Special Interest forums?

Also, when I initially posted the images (February 2012,) they posted. It's only now that I notice they're no longer posted. How did they manage to initially post?

What was the rationale for banning images from Special Interest forums?
Obviously the discussion happened before you joined FT. Maybe you would like to dig into the old threads w/r/t enabling images on FT?

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/916473-update-motion-failed-allow-static-images-except-omni.html

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/926620-voting-complete-motion-passed-allow-static-images-many-forums.html

Also there's this newer thread: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/1321282-images-allow-them-all-forums.html

Obviously the discussion happened before you joined FT. Maybe you would like to dig into the old threads w/r/t enabling images on FT?

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/916473-update-motion-failed-allow-static-images-except-omni.html

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/926620-voting-complete-motion-passed-allow-static-images-many-forums.html

Also there's this newer thread: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/1321282-images-allow-them-all-forums.html
Thanks for posting. But why would the images have posted initially when I posted them, Feb 2012?

What was the rationale for banning images from Special Interest forums?

Also, when I initially posted the images (February 2012,) they posted. It's only now that I notice they're no longer posted. How did they manage to initially post?

Because when the CD researched this, I went and looked at all the forums in Special Interest forums and 3-4 had mistakenly been set up allowing images. The TB had excluded Special Interest forums when originally voting on images a couple of years ago. The next vote only covered OMNI and OMNI/PR. So the CD went and turned off the images in those forums to be consistent with what the TB had voted on in the past. And hence, the motion.

But why would the images have posted initially when I posted them, Feb 2012?
Why would the answer to your question have anything to do with the topic at hand in TB Topics Forum? :confused:

If I were you, I would have either posted that question/s in Technical Issues Forum (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/technical-issues-386/) or send a PM to the forum mod. ;)

Because when the CD researched this, I went and looked at all the forums in Special Interest forums and 3-4 had mistakenly been set up allowing images. The TB had excluded Special Interest forums when originally voting on images a couple of years ago. The next vote only covered OMNI and OMNI/PR. So the CD went and turned off the images in those forums to be consistent with what the TB had voted on in the past. And hence, the motion.

I got it. Thanks.

Why would the answer to your question have anything to do with the topic at hand in TB Topics Forum? :confused:

If I were you, I would have either posted that question/s in Technical Issues Forum (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/technical-issues-386/) or send a PM to the forum mod. ;)

Honestly, because once we were on the topic, I figured someone here might know. And I was right!
I didn't bother posting there cuz it didn't bother me that much. Didn't PM Carol because I didn't see the need for something so small. And didn't PM the forum mod cuz it doesn't have one :p

I am in favor- I assume bandwdith limitations etc have been taken into consideration. I hope I do not get over-enthusiastic and post too many

Images - yes

I would also like to see a size restriction, I hate it when somebody uploads something 3000 pixels wide so that you can't read the board without scrolling left and right. There should be a width limit.

Images - yes

I would also like to see a size restriction, I hate it when somebody uploads something 3000 pixels wide so that you can't read the board without scrolling left and right. There should be a width limit.

DEFINITELY +1 - I was trying to convey that message in my post above but I worded it badly. Definitely needs a size limitation IMHO^

In favor of size limit (physically - I hate when I need to scroll all the way to the right because the picture is HUGE), but pictures across all forums. Yes!

In accordance with the recently changed guidelines that means we'll announce if a motion has passed or failed once enough yes or no votes have been recorded by TB members, this is the public notice that this motion will pass as it has secured 6 yes votes.

Please note that not all TB members have voted yet, and so a final announcement with who voted yes/no will not be posted until all 9 have voted or the voting period ends.

In accordance with the recently changed guidelines that means we'll announce if a motion has passed or failed once enough yes or no votes have been recorded by TB members, this is the public notice that this motion will pass as it has secured 6 yes votes.

Please note that not all TB members have voted yet, and so a final announcement with who voted yes/no will not be posted until all 9 have voted or the voting period ends.
Awesome! Thanks for sharing Sharon, and thank you TB for voting in favor!

Is there a guideline for photo posting along with the TOS? I have looked and can't find it - if I'm just lost, can someone point me to it?

If there isn't one, like Peter, I strongly share concerns about turning on photos until such a policy exists. It's not right to make this policy change without appropriate support. Peter and I will have to deal with inappropriate images - I want both guidance and something to point at to explain a policy decision before you ask me to do this.

95% of the time it's not going to be a problem. 5% - particularly in gray areas (what do you mean I can't post photos of the performances at the Black Party? It was part of my trip!") it will.

To start, as mentioned in the thread, the image should be safe for work, on topic, and of an appropriate size.

In the GLBT forum, we've always been more tolerant of sexual topics, and I think we should remain so, so what's out of bounds needs to be defined clearly.

Is there a guideline for photo posting along with the TOS? I have looked and can't find it - if I'm just lost, can someone point me to it?

If there isn't one, like Peter, I strongly share concerns about turning on photos until such a policy exists. It's not right to make this policy change without appropriate support. Peter and I will have to deal with inappropriate images - I want both guidance and something to point at to explain a policy decision before you ask me to do this.

95% of the time it's not going to be a problem. 5% - particularly in gray areas (what do you mean I can't post photos of the performances at the Black Party? It was part of my trip!") it will.

To start, as mentioned in the thread, the image should be safe for work, on topic, and of an appropriate size.

In the GLBT forum, we've always been more tolerant of sexual topics, and I think we should remain so, so what's out of bounds needs to be defined clearly.


Here are the guidelines on images:

http://www.flyertalk.com/help/rules.php#q103


Here is the discussion of the motion that created that TOS: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/926620-voting-complete-motion-passed-allow-static-images-many-forums.html

I would suggest that q103 hyperlink back to q88 http://www.flyertalk.com/help/rules.php#q88 and that q88 be lightly edited to include images as part of the discussion. It would also help if there was more discussion of what constituted an inappropriate image. (Can it be sexual in intent? If you wouldn't show it to your mother? Men topless but not women? It doesn't need to be exhaustive or ridiculous. There just needs to be something.)

As I said, most will be fine. We're going to be dealing with the small percentage that aren't. I want something to point them to so it doesn't look as if we're making it up as we go.

In favor of size limit (physically - I hate when I need to scroll all the way to the right because the picture is HUGE), but pictures across all forums. Yes!

Perhaps an automatic filter could be set up to automatically downsize the images.

I would suggest that q103 hyperlink back to q88 http://www.flyertalk.com/help/rules.php#q88 and that q88 be lightly edited to include images as part of the discussion. It would also help if there was more discussion of what constituted an inappropriate image. (Can it be sexual in intent? If you wouldn't show it to your mother? Men topless but not women? It doesn't need to be exhaustive or ridiculous. There just needs to be something.)

As I said, most will be fine. We're going to be dealing with the small percentage that aren't. I want something to point them to so it doesn't look as if we're making it up as we go.

Typically when we endeavour to get more specific than that TOS we have moderators tell us to stop tying their hands and taking away their discretion. We are told that different forums develop different personalities and styles based on what the posters in that forum want (well, what the moderators think the posters want, anyway).

So I doubt you are going to get much more specificity than what you see.

IME and IMHO. :)

Typically when we endeavour to get more specific than that TOS we have moderators tell us to stop tying their hands and taking away their discretion. We are told that different forums develop different personalities and styles based on what the posters in that forum want (well, what the moderators think the posters want, anyway).

So I doubt you are going to get much more specificity than what you see.

IME and IMHO. :)

Yes, I agree. The TOS already allows moderators to remove images they feel violates the TOS. What this motion simply does is eliminate the GLBT forum (and the other Special Interest Travel forums) as a place (places) with special rules. FTers should be trusted to post images that fall within the bounds of good taste. If not, those posters should receive discipline.

As it is, what's stopping a poster from posting the link to inappropriate images?

As it is, what's stopping a poster from posting the link to inappropriate images?

If they currently do that, the mods usually delete the link & notify the member. That's my understanding. So this would be similar.

BTW - since this is going to pass as it has the requisite votes & we're just waiting on the remaining votes to come in, the Community Director has been pro-active & enabled images in the Special Interest Forums. Enjoy the ability to post images in those forums, and again please abide by TOS when doing so.

Cheers.

If they currently do that, the mods usually delete the link & notify the member. That's my understanding. So this would be similar.

BTW - since this is going to pass as it has the requisite votes & we're just waiting on the remaining votes to come in, the Community Director has been pro-active & enabled images in the Special Interest Forums. Enjoy the ability to post images in those forums, and again please abide by TOS when doing so.

Cheers.
Thanks!

If they currently do that, the mods usually delete the link & notify the member. That's my understanding. So this would be similar.

BTW - since this is going to pass as it has the requisite votes & we're just waiting on the remaining votes to come in, the Community Director has been pro-active & enabled images in the Special Interest Forums. Enjoy the ability to post images in those forums, and again please abide by TOS when doing so.

Cheers.

The motion would make sense, to lessen the work load of the mods. Seems like only experienced FTers know not to post images on certain forums. I didn't know the rule existed until reading this thread to be honest.. So would make sense to keep the image rules uniform for all forums.

On March 20, 2012, Talkboard passed 8-1:

"TalkBoard recommends that images be turned on for all current and new forums on FT."

Voting Yes: bhatnasx, Cholula, goalie, jackal, kokonutz, nsx, RichMSN, SkiAdcock
Voting No: Spiff