Avatars
Mar 14, 2014, 7:18 pm
#31
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: IAD/DCA
Posts: 31,797
this would at least double the vertical size of one-line posts?
maybe it could be added to drop down menu when one clicks on post author?
maybe it could be added to drop down menu when one clicks on post author?
Mar 14, 2014, 7:58 pm
#32
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,878
Ok, for sake of argument, let's say avatars are allowed...
Are there guidelines for them the way there are for signatures?
What if an avatar is deemed offensive (i.e. I have one that says "Smisek is a ...." [intentionally putting in the "...."])?
Will there be "avatar moderators" the way there are forum and signature moderators? If yes, will they arbitrarily hatchet an avatar the way some moderators hatchet a post (and if yes, that means a moderator has access to a user's profile)? Will they contact the member and "advise them" to remove the avatar? Will they do nothing as is the case (imho) with signatures which do not conform to FT guidelines?
Again, all for sake of argument
Are there guidelines for them the way there are for signatures?
What if an avatar is deemed offensive (i.e. I have one that says "Smisek is a ...." [intentionally putting in the "...."])?
Will there be "avatar moderators" the way there are forum and signature moderators? If yes, will they arbitrarily hatchet an avatar the way some moderators hatchet a post (and if yes, that means a moderator has access to a user's profile)? Will they contact the member and "advise them" to remove the avatar? Will they do nothing as is the case (imho) with signatures which do not conform to FT guidelines?
Again, all for sake of argument
Mar 14, 2014, 9:38 pm
#33
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 51,050
Ok, for sake of argument, let's say avatars are allowed...
Are there guidelines for them the way there are for signatures?
What if an avatar is deemed offensive (i.e. I have one that says "Smisek is a ...." [intentionally putting in the "...."])?
Will there be "avatar moderators" the way there are forum and signature moderators? If yes, will they arbitrarily hatchet an avatar the way some moderators hatchet a post (and if yes, that means a moderator has access to a user's profile)? Will they contact the member and "advise them" to remove the avatar? Will they do nothing as is the case (imho) with signatures which do not conform to FT guidelines?
Again, all for sake of argument
Are there guidelines for them the way there are for signatures?
What if an avatar is deemed offensive (i.e. I have one that says "Smisek is a ...." [intentionally putting in the "...."])?
Will there be "avatar moderators" the way there are forum and signature moderators? If yes, will they arbitrarily hatchet an avatar the way some moderators hatchet a post (and if yes, that means a moderator has access to a user's profile)? Will they contact the member and "advise them" to remove the avatar? Will they do nothing as is the case (imho) with signatures which do not conform to FT guidelines?
Again, all for sake of argument
Mar 14, 2014, 9:56 pm
#34
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,878
Originally Posted by goalie
Ok, for sake of argument, let's say avatars are allowed...
Are there guidelines for them the way there are for signatures?
What if an avatar is deemed offensive (i.e. I have one that says "Smisek is a ...." [intentionally putting in the "...."])?
Will there be "avatar moderators" the way there are forum and signature moderators? If yes, will they arbitrarily hatchet an avatar the way some moderators hatchet a post (and if yes, that means a moderator has access to a user's profile)? Will they contact the member and "advise them" to remove the avatar? Will they do nothing as is the case (imho) with signatures which do not conform to FT guidelines?
Again, all for sake of argument
Are there guidelines for them the way there are for signatures?
What if an avatar is deemed offensive (i.e. I have one that says "Smisek is a ...." [intentionally putting in the "...."])?
Will there be "avatar moderators" the way there are forum and signature moderators? If yes, will they arbitrarily hatchet an avatar the way some moderators hatchet a post (and if yes, that means a moderator has access to a user's profile)? Will they contact the member and "advise them" to remove the avatar? Will they do nothing as is the case (imho) with signatures which do not conform to FT guidelines?
Again, all for sake of argument
Mar 15, 2014, 6:00 am
#35
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 51,050
Mar 15, 2014, 2:26 pm
#36
Moderator: American AAdvantage
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NorCal - SMF area
Programs: AA LT Plat; HH LT Diamond, Maître-plongeur des Muccis
Posts: 62,948
Ok, for sake of argument, let's say avatars are allowed...
Are there guidelines for them the way there are for signatures?
What if an avatar is deemed offensive (i.e. I have one that says "Smisek is a ...." [intentionally putting in the "...."])?
Will there be "avatar moderators" the way there are forum and signature moderators? If yes, will they arbitrarily hatchet an avatar the way some moderators hatchet a post (and if yes, that means a moderator has access to a user's profile)? Will they contact the member and "advise them" to remove the avatar? Will they do nothing as is the case (imho) with signatures which do not conform to FT guidelines?
Again, all for sake of argument
Are there guidelines for them the way there are for signatures?
What if an avatar is deemed offensive (i.e. I have one that says "Smisek is a ...." [intentionally putting in the "...."])?
Will there be "avatar moderators" the way there are forum and signature moderators? If yes, will they arbitrarily hatchet an avatar the way some moderators hatchet a post (and if yes, that means a moderator has access to a user's profile)? Will they contact the member and "advise them" to remove the avatar? Will they do nothing as is the case (imho) with signatures which do not conform to FT guidelines?
Again, all for sake of argument
Yes, such an avatar would be redacted because it violates the offensiveness and attack clauses of the TOS / FlyerTalk Rules.
There are no "signature moderators" - there are moderators who serve in their assigned fora, and four senior moderators - most have forum assignments and they also moderate all unmoderated fora as well as serve in consultative roles..
They do not "hatchet" posts, they moderate in accordance with the TOS / Rules everyone agreed to abide by when granted the privileges of membership. That means if a post goes off topic or otherwise violates the TOS, it gets deleted or redacted, or the member is asked to redact the post in question. Moderators (who may consult with the Signatures Committee about questionable signatures) may ask members to change their signatures, or to edit their posts,
At the moment commercial signatures are not prohibited in signatures. Just because someone disagrees with a signature does not automatically mean the signature will change. We have some members who are very avid about using the "Alert a moderator" function; although these "AMPs" are often very helpful, it does not mean every request will be acted upon.
Signatures - link to this guideline
We do not wish to restrict your right to display personal views, ideology, etc. but do ask that you remain respectful of others in your signature lines.
Signatures, any links they contain and the content of the linked site are subject to the FlyerTalk content standards concerning decency, obscenity, the furthering of illegal activities and offensive language. As with any postings on FT, personal attacks are never permitted. Note that this list is not exhaustive and that the ultimate decision on the permissibility of a signature rests with the administrators.
To be eligible to display a signature with each post, you must be a member of FlyerTalk for at least 90 days and have contributed 90 posts to the community. "Post padding" or other methods to artificially inflate a post count in order to add a signature are a violation of the ToS and will result in disciplinary action.
The following rules also apply to signatures:
Should you wish not to view signatures, you may shut them off. To do so, go to MyFlyerTalk and click on Edit Options on the left-hand side of the page. Scroll down to Thread Display Options and remove the check from the Show Signatures box.
If you have any questions as to whether something is acceptable, send a private message to a moderator.
We do not wish to restrict your right to display personal views, ideology, etc. but do ask that you remain respectful of others in your signature lines.
Signatures, any links they contain and the content of the linked site are subject to the FlyerTalk content standards concerning decency, obscenity, the furthering of illegal activities and offensive language. As with any postings on FT, personal attacks are never permitted. Note that this list is not exhaustive and that the ultimate decision on the permissibility of a signature rests with the administrators.
To be eligible to display a signature with each post, you must be a member of FlyerTalk for at least 90 days and have contributed 90 posts to the community. "Post padding" or other methods to artificially inflate a post count in order to add a signature are a violation of the ToS and will result in disciplinary action.
The following rules also apply to signatures:
- Use the normal posting font size.
- Limit your signature to two lines.
- Text should comply with our regular posting rules. No all-caps, no alternating caps, etc.
- Do not make your signature too long or obtrusive through overly creative use of punctuation, color, etc.
- Avoid putting your username in your signature as it's already on the top of each of your posts.
- Do not post or embed external images in your signature.
Should you wish not to view signatures, you may shut them off. To do so, go to MyFlyerTalk and click on Edit Options on the left-hand side of the page. Scroll down to Thread Display Options and remove the check from the Show Signatures box.
If you have any questions as to whether something is acceptable, send a private message to a moderator.
Mar 15, 2014, 5:20 pm
#37
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,878
For clarification (meaning this is not really discussion, it is a point of information):
Yes, such an avatar would be redacted because it violates the offensiveness and attack clauses of the TOS / FlyerTalk Rules.
There are no "signature moderators" - there are moderators who serve in their assigned fora, and four senior moderators - most have forum assignments and they also moderate all unmoderated fora as well as serve in consultative roles..
They do not "hatchet" posts, they moderate in accordance with the TOS / Rules everyone agreed to abide by when granted the privileges of membership. That means if a post goes off topic or otherwise violates the TOS, it gets deleted or redacted, or the member is asked to redact the post in question. Moderators (who may consult with the Signatures Committee about questionable signatures) may ask members to change their signatures, or to edit their posts,
At the moment commercial signatures are not prohibited in signatures. Just because someone disagrees with a signature does not automatically mean the signature will change. We have some members who are very avid about using the "Alert a moderator" function; although these "AMPs" are often very helpful, it does not mean every request will be acted upon.
Yes, such an avatar would be redacted because it violates the offensiveness and attack clauses of the TOS / FlyerTalk Rules.
There are no "signature moderators" - there are moderators who serve in their assigned fora, and four senior moderators - most have forum assignments and they also moderate all unmoderated fora as well as serve in consultative roles..
They do not "hatchet" posts, they moderate in accordance with the TOS / Rules everyone agreed to abide by when granted the privileges of membership. That means if a post goes off topic or otherwise violates the TOS, it gets deleted or redacted, or the member is asked to redact the post in question. Moderators (who may consult with the Signatures Committee about questionable signatures) may ask members to change their signatures, or to edit their posts,
At the moment commercial signatures are not prohibited in signatures. Just because someone disagrees with a signature does not automatically mean the signature will change. We have some members who are very avid about using the "Alert a moderator" function; although these "AMPs" are often very helpful, it does not mean every request will be acted upon.
so I might have missed it) I don't see anything regarding "avatars" and that's why I used the signature comparison (where as you know, that is a hot button/issue for some members) and that is why I asked how an avatar which is deemed offensive gets removed and that is why compared it to a moderator deleting as post (and yes, some moderators do "hatchet" as each moderator has a different style of how they moderate but that is a discussion for another day 
. So with that, I'm asking how will the issues of "offensive avatars" be handled and in what manner and from your response, it's simply going to be left up to the moderator(s) to decide and as you know, discussing moderator actions is not allowed in public and it takes a PM to all of the forum moderators to get an answer back so again I ask, How will/would an offensive avatar be handled.i.e. what if someone doesn't like cats and mine is a cat, what if it's simply a picture of a very ugly face, what if it's a Red Sox logo as find me a Yankees' fan who doesn't find that offensive. Yes, these are avatars which would fall into the realm of adhering to the TOS vs an avatar of a woman's chest or and avatar of Jeff Smisek's face with say devil horns or "Smisek Sucks" written underneath it but I'm still looking for specific answers and I may be running around in circles but I'd like to know
Mar 15, 2014, 5:23 pm
#38
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: BOS/ORH
Programs: AS 75K
Posts: 18,323
Avatars by each post would be annoying. A Grumpy cat here, a picture of a plane there and my ugly mug on the next post below.
I view the full site on my phone and it uses up a lot of my bandwidth. Luckily i'm still on unlimited data but many have caps and probably don't want to pay extra for useless data.
I'd be all for increasing the photo size on the User Profile screen though. Its hard to see.
I view the full site on my phone and it uses up a lot of my bandwidth. Luckily i'm still on unlimited data but many have caps and probably don't want to pay extra for useless data.
I'd be all for increasing the photo size on the User Profile screen though. Its hard to see.
Mar 16, 2014, 7:54 am
#39
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2002
Programs: UALifetimePremierGold, Marriott LifetimeTitanium
Posts: 71,110
Mar 31, 2014, 8:07 am
#40
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2008
Programs: AA EXP/LTP, BA GGL/CCR/GfL, HH D/LTD, SPG/MR Plat/LTP
Posts: 10,076
Avatars by each post would be annoying. A Grumpy cat here, a picture of a plane there and my ugly mug on the next post below.
I view the full site on my phone and it uses up a lot of my bandwidth. Luckily i'm still on unlimited data but many have caps and probably don't want to pay extra for useless data.
I'd be all for increasing the photo size on the User Profile screen though. Its hard to see.
I view the full site on my phone and it uses up a lot of my bandwidth. Luckily i'm still on unlimited data but many have caps and probably don't want to pay extra for useless data.
I'd be all for increasing the photo size on the User Profile screen though. Its hard to see.
Another good point.
Mar 31, 2014, 12:49 pm
#41
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: where lions are led by donkeys...
Programs: Lifetime Gold, Global Entry, Hertz PC, and my wallet
Posts: 20,342
Or we could have a vote to see if the current stance reflects what the community wants.
Apr 7, 2014, 8:58 pm
#42
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: SGF
Programs: AS, AA, UA, AGR S (former 75K, GLD, 1K, and S+, now an elite peon)
Posts: 23,194
I'm torn. I like the idea of a little individual flair. I also think the FlyerTalk software desperately needs an overhaul, both in functionality as well as in look and feel. I know my esteemed friend Mr. CMK10 doesn't like his cheese moved (too much), but we really do look like we're stuck in 1998.
On the other hand, FlyerTalk's current skin is crisp and efficient. It loads quickly and doesn't put much of a strain on browser/memory/CPU (a plus for those old fuddy-duddies with slow connections who always seem to make appearances on these threads vehemently opposed to anything resembling progress). The question is, will avatars compromise that?
I don't know. If done well, I don't think so. First of all, they can be displayed small--small enough so as to not affect the page layout and make posts taller than they currently are. And second, I really don't think it'll affect page loading speed. My avatar is 2.5KB, and mine is comparatively large. Even at 40 posts per page (which is what any sane FlyerTalker has their preferences set at), and even if a page contains 40 posts from 40 unique users (unlikely), that's all of 100KB. Even on the slowest 256kbps connection, that's 3 seconds...during which time you can easily start reading the page and barely notice the avatar images haven't finished loading. And the software should be able to easily shrink them to a smaller size for in-thread viewing (and allowing people to click to view a larger version), making them load even faster.
So, I think it's possible. And I think there is some good that can come from it--things that have already been mentioned upthread (an easier way to see who's posting, especially for those of us visual types). I don't know; I don't have a strong opinion on it. Just posting my analysis.
Whatever you do, though, please, for the love of all that is good and holy, make sure avatars like this are against the TOS:
http://milepoint.com/forums/data/ava...jpg?1340076808
On the other hand, FlyerTalk's current skin is crisp and efficient. It loads quickly and doesn't put much of a strain on browser/memory/CPU (a plus for those old fuddy-duddies with slow connections who always seem to make appearances on these threads vehemently opposed to anything resembling progress
). The question is, will avatars compromise that?I don't know. If done well, I don't think so. First of all, they can be displayed small--small enough so as to not affect the page layout and make posts taller than they currently are. And second, I really don't think it'll affect page loading speed. My avatar is 2.5KB, and mine is comparatively large. Even at 40 posts per page (which is what any sane FlyerTalker has their preferences set at), and even if a page contains 40 posts from 40 unique users (unlikely), that's all of 100KB. Even on the slowest 256kbps connection, that's 3 seconds...during which time you can easily start reading the page and barely notice the avatar images haven't finished loading. And the software should be able to easily shrink them to a smaller size for in-thread viewing (and allowing people to click to view a larger version), making them load even faster.
So, I think it's possible. And I think there is some good that can come from it--things that have already been mentioned upthread (an easier way to see who's posting, especially for those of us visual types). I don't know; I don't have a strong opinion on it. Just posting my analysis.
Whatever you do, though, please, for the love of all that is good and holy, make sure avatars like this are against the TOS:
http://milepoint.com/forums/data/ava...jpg?1340076808
Apr 8, 2014, 8:31 am
#43
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2002
Programs: UALifetimePremierGold, Marriott LifetimeTitanium
Posts: 71,110
A # of the people opposed are not fuddie-duddies 
but FTers who have provided valid input on their reasons against, both for tech/access purposes (the irony being some of them are very tech savvy, so not luddites) & as well as aesthetic reasons.
Cheers.
but FTers who have provided valid input on their reasons against, both for tech/access purposes (the irony being some of them are very tech savvy, so not luddites) & as well as aesthetic reasons. Cheers.
Apr 8, 2014, 9:15 am
#44
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Durham, NC (RDU/GSO/CLT)
Programs: AA EXP/MM, DL GM, UA Platinum, HH DIA, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Platinum, Marriott Titanium, Hertz PC
Posts: 33,857
I'm torn. I like the idea of a little individual flair. I also think the FlyerTalk software desperately needs an overhaul, both in functionality as well as in look and feel. I know my esteemed friend Mr. CMK10 doesn't like his cheese moved (too much), but we really do look like we're stuck in 1998.
On the other hand, FlyerTalk's current skin is crisp and efficient. It loads quickly and doesn't put much of a strain on browser/memory/CPU (a plus for those old fuddy-duddies with slow connections who always seem to make appearances on these threads vehemently opposed to anything resembling progress). The question is, will avatars compromise that?
I don't know. If done well, I don't think so. First of all, they can be displayed small--small enough so as to not affect the page layout and make posts taller than they currently are. And second, I really don't think it'll affect page loading speed. My avatar is 2.5KB, and mine is comparatively large. Even at 40 posts per page (which is what any sane FlyerTalker has their preferences set at), and even if a page contains 40 posts from 40 unique users (unlikely), that's all of 100KB. Even on the slowest 256kbps connection, that's 3 seconds...during which time you can easily start reading the page and barely notice the avatar images haven't finished loading. And the software should be able to easily shrink them to a smaller size for in-thread viewing (and allowing people to click to view a larger version), making them load even faster.
So, I think it's possible. And I think there is some good that can come from it--things that have already been mentioned upthread (an easier way to see who's posting, especially for those of us visual types). I don't know; I don't have a strong opinion on it. Just posting my analysis.
Whatever you do, though, please, for the love of all that is good and holy, make sure avatars like this are against the TOS:
http://milepoint.com/forums/data/ava...jpg?1340076808
On the other hand, FlyerTalk's current skin is crisp and efficient. It loads quickly and doesn't put much of a strain on browser/memory/CPU (a plus for those old fuddy-duddies with slow connections who always seem to make appearances on these threads vehemently opposed to anything resembling progress
). The question is, will avatars compromise that?I don't know. If done well, I don't think so. First of all, they can be displayed small--small enough so as to not affect the page layout and make posts taller than they currently are. And second, I really don't think it'll affect page loading speed. My avatar is 2.5KB, and mine is comparatively large. Even at 40 posts per page (which is what any sane FlyerTalker has their preferences set at), and even if a page contains 40 posts from 40 unique users (unlikely), that's all of 100KB. Even on the slowest 256kbps connection, that's 3 seconds...during which time you can easily start reading the page and barely notice the avatar images haven't finished loading. And the software should be able to easily shrink them to a smaller size for in-thread viewing (and allowing people to click to view a larger version), making them load even faster.
So, I think it's possible. And I think there is some good that can come from it--things that have already been mentioned upthread (an easier way to see who's posting, especially for those of us visual types). I don't know; I don't have a strong opinion on it. Just posting my analysis.
Whatever you do, though, please, for the love of all that is good and holy, make sure avatars like this are against the TOS:
http://milepoint.com/forums/data/ava...jpg?1340076808
Though I'm a 15 post per page guy and always will be
Apr 8, 2014, 4:46 pm
#45
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Bye Delta
Programs: AA EXP, HH Diamond, IHG Plat, Hyatt Plat, Marriott Plat, Nat'l Exec Elite, Avis Presidents Club
Posts: 16,273
I'm torn. I like the idea of a little individual flair. I also think the FlyerTalk software desperately needs an overhaul, both in functionality as well as in look and feel. I know my esteemed friend Mr. CMK10 doesn't like his cheese moved (too much), but we really do look like we're stuck in 1998.
On the other hand, FlyerTalk's current skin is crisp and efficient. It loads quickly and doesn't put much of a strain on browser/memory/CPU (a plus for those old fuddy-duddies with slow connections who always seem to make appearances on these threads vehemently opposed to anything resembling progress). The question is, will avatars compromise that?
I don't know. If done well, I don't think so. First of all, they can be displayed small--small enough so as to not affect the page layout and make posts taller than they currently are. And second, I really don't think it'll affect page loading speed. My avatar is 2.5KB, and mine is comparatively large. Even at 40 posts per page (which is what any sane FlyerTalker has their preferences set at), and even if a page contains 40 posts from 40 unique users (unlikely), that's all of 100KB. Even on the slowest 256kbps connection, that's 3 seconds...during which time you can easily start reading the page and barely notice the avatar images haven't finished loading. And the software should be able to easily shrink them to a smaller size for in-thread viewing (and allowing people to click to view a larger version), making them load even faster.
So, I think it's possible. And I think there is some good that can come from it--things that have already been mentioned upthread (an easier way to see who's posting, especially for those of us visual types). I don't know; I don't have a strong opinion on it. Just posting my analysis.
Whatever you do, though, please, for the love of all that is good and holy, make sure avatars like this are against the TOS:
http://milepoint.com/forums/data/ava...jpg?1340076808
On the other hand, FlyerTalk's current skin is crisp and efficient. It loads quickly and doesn't put much of a strain on browser/memory/CPU (a plus for those old fuddy-duddies with slow connections who always seem to make appearances on these threads vehemently opposed to anything resembling progress
). The question is, will avatars compromise that?I don't know. If done well, I don't think so. First of all, they can be displayed small--small enough so as to not affect the page layout and make posts taller than they currently are. And second, I really don't think it'll affect page loading speed. My avatar is 2.5KB, and mine is comparatively large. Even at 40 posts per page (which is what any sane FlyerTalker has their preferences set at), and even if a page contains 40 posts from 40 unique users (unlikely), that's all of 100KB. Even on the slowest 256kbps connection, that's 3 seconds...during which time you can easily start reading the page and barely notice the avatar images haven't finished loading. And the software should be able to easily shrink them to a smaller size for in-thread viewing (and allowing people to click to view a larger version), making them load even faster.
So, I think it's possible. And I think there is some good that can come from it--things that have already been mentioned upthread (an easier way to see who's posting, especially for those of us visual types). I don't know; I don't have a strong opinion on it. Just posting my analysis.
Whatever you do, though, please, for the love of all that is good and holy, make sure avatars like this are against the TOS:
http://milepoint.com/forums/data/ava...jpg?1340076808
Edit: It's actually 150 megabytes.
Last edited by javabytes; Apr 9, 2014 at 10:32 am Reason: Multiplication is hard.