Motion Passed: Allow Images in Omni and Omni P/R
May 25, 2011, 1:11 pm
#61
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 51,047
Mods have nothing to do with TB voting. Not to mention the 9 votes by TBers are not counted by any mod. Are you sure you know how TB works on FT? 
We FTers can't vote, only TBers vote on TB motions. Nine TBers will listen to input and opinions from general membership, make the best judgment, then cast their votes accordingly. That's why "we're arguing the point, instead of voting."
ETA:
It's not about trust and has nothing to do with trust.
I say it's sad how many members of our community don't understand, or choose not to spend time knowing, how TalkBoard operates nor get involved properly so to better FT.
We FTers can't vote, only TBers vote on TB motions. Nine TBers will listen to input and opinions from general membership, make the best judgment, then cast their votes accordingly. That's why "we're arguing the point, instead of voting."
ETA:
It's not about trust and has nothing to do with trust.
I say it's sad how many members of our community don't understand, or choose not to spend time knowing, how TalkBoard operates nor get involved properly so to better FT.
TB is elected each year, with four or five seats up for grabs. Everyone on FT should pay attention when TB elections are impending, and should vote after carefully weighing the options.
May 25, 2011, 1:17 pm
#62
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Yiron, Israel
Programs: Bates Motel Plat
Posts: 68,926
Yesterday, I had lunch with my entire family. Uncle Irving, who was not thrilled about being dragged out of home to go to a restaurant where he had to pick up part of the check, immediately demanded to know why we were having this dinner.
"To celebrate the election results," I told him.
"Whadda I care if Bush or Kerry won?" Irving demanded. "Did either one of them serve in the big one -- WWII? No! They were slackers!"
"Not that election," I said. "The important one -- I was elected to TalkBoard."
"You're going to be a congressman?" Irving exclaimed. "I can't say I'm surprised. You always were a liar and a crook. I guess it was only natural that you would wind up in Washington."
"TalkBoard is much different than Congress," I told him. "For one thing, we don't get any pay."
"Then why bother being a member?" Irving asked.
"It's all about power," I said. "TalkBoard has the power not to create forums."
"Can't anybody not create forums?" he wondered.
"Sure," I admitted, "but they can only not create forums unofficially. TalkBoard can officially not create forums."
"And if TalkBoard doesn't officially create a forum than it won't exist?" Irving asked.
"Only if the board owner agrees," I said. "Otherwise, he is free to create the forum which the TalkBoard officially did not create."
"That doesn't sound like a lot of power to me," Irving said.
"Well, that's not all TalkBoard does," I told him. "It also sets guidelines for itself and elects its president. These are very important steps. Otherwise, when members ask for a forum and TalkBoard decides not to create it, it would be doing so in a chaotic fashion."
"Tell me," said Irving, "you said you were elected. Did anybody else bother running?"
"They certainly did," my mother injected. "A lot of people. I even voted for some of them."
"You didn't vote for Dovster?" Irving wondered.
"No," Mom said. "It wasn't because of any philosophical issues. I just don't like him personally."
May 25, 2011, 1:34 pm
#63
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
May 25, 2011, 2:24 pm
#64
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Programs: AAdvantage Lifetime Gold/Some Years Platinum
Posts: 995
) In the UK, such pictures are not considered offensive (at least to the extent they are in the US) - they're available in every corner market, and 12-year-olds can pick up the newspapers and see them. Such questions will come up over and over (and over and over) with images in OMNI, and each moderator will have his/her own standards. What a hassle!
May 26, 2011, 1:24 am
#65
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Y'all missed Jenbel 's point. Why is that link inappropriate? (It is to me, but I'm a prudish American. ) In the UK, such pictures are not considered offensive (at least to the extent they are in the US) - they're available in every corner market, and 12-year-olds can pick up the newspapers and see them.
Such questions will come up over and over (and over and over) with images in OMNI, and each moderator will have his/her own standards. What a hassle!
) In the UK, such pictures are not considered offensive (at least to the extent they are in the US) - they're available in every corner market, and 12-year-olds can pick up the newspapers and see them. Such questions will come up over and over (and over and over) with images in OMNI, and each moderator will have his/her own standards. What a hassle!
Last edited by GUWonder; May 26, 2011 at 6:36 am
May 26, 2011, 6:22 am
#66
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 51,047
Indeed, that which may be considered offensive in one context on FT and result in FT TOS enforcement may not be considered offensive in the same or another context on FT by some others -- with the determination of what/how things follow from such perhaps depending on what/who the target is and who/how the determination is made.
While images might be helpful in certain threads, there's no reason people cannot post links to those images and those who wish to see the image can.
May 26, 2011, 6:40 am
#67
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 2002
Location: YEG
Programs: HH Silver
Posts: 56,446
I'm against this motion for the simple fact it opens up a pandora's box of questions about photo suitability and judgement calls for volunteer Mod.'s to make. I rarely venture to either forum but that's MHO since TB is soliciting input.
May 26, 2011, 7:32 am
#68
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
Which is why I think images in OMNI and P/R should not be allowed. Too often, an image would offend some segment of the OMNI population, while not offending others.
While images might be helpful in certain threads, there's no reason people cannot post links to those images and those who wish to see the image can.
While images might be helpful in certain threads, there's no reason people cannot post links to those images and those who wish to see the image can.
May 26, 2011, 7:55 am
#69
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 51,047
Since when has the standard for OMNI/PR been "non-offense"? OMNI/PR is, by definition, edgy and there are, daily, posts that will offend someone. As a case in point, just yesterday an overt anti-semite made a post that, not only was off-topic, but was specifically offensive to me and several others because of its anti-semitic content. My solution, which works just fine, is to have that poster on ignore, a solution that I recommended to another FTer who also found the post, and the poster, offensive. The only standard for OMNI in this regard is that it be SFW. If, in fact, some FTers find a picture, such as the one in this thread of the woman in a bikini, offensive, it is far more productive to explain why they consider it offensive and, perhaps, change a few minds in the process, than to safeguard against possible offensive by precluding prospectively any posting of pictures, offensive or not.
If one finds the photo in this thread offensive, then in order to do what you say, those FTers would be subjected to that photo and probably other similar photos numerous times in the thread, because there would be no shortage of other FTers quoting the post or posting similar photos. In one paragraph, your suggestion is that if one finds something offensive, they should simply place that FTer on ignore, but in the next paragraph, your suggestion is that someone who is offended by something should try to convince others why they are offended, and further subject themselves to content they deem offensive?
No one is saying links to sites with images like that cannot be posted, just that some of us prefer photos to not be embedded in the posts.
Reasons for that preference include:
NSFW images
time for pages to load
use of bandwidth/data usage on mobile devices
May 26, 2011, 1:37 pm
#70
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: On the road somewhere
Programs: DL, National, Marriott, Hilton
Posts: 4,304
I support the motion. I'm not in OMNI all that often and I've been in P/R once.
May 26, 2011, 3:01 pm
#71
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
May 26, 2011, 5:39 pm
#72
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Montreal / Detroit / Miami
Posts: 745
I'd vote no for pics, photos, drawings, stickpeople etc. For the reasons given by others. So as not to turn this into a thesis, I'd just say, it's too distracting and unnecessary.
I'd prefer to think of this a preference for the New York Times vs. USA Today.
(although of course, when I'm traveling on an airplane, I read USA Today cover to cover but fall asleep half way through the NY Times
)
I'd prefer to think of this a preference for the New York Times vs. USA Today.
(although of course, when I'm traveling on an airplane, I read USA Today cover to cover but fall asleep half way through the NY Times
)
May 27, 2011, 4:27 am
#73
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: back to my roots in Scotland!
Programs: Tamsin - what else is there to say?
Posts: 47,843
)) in Randy's post as much as you like competitions on Communitybuzz!
May 27, 2011, 11:54 am
#74
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Suwanee,Ga ,usa
Posts: 3,617
Agree with the posts that vote "No!" on images.
May 27, 2011, 4:31 pm
#75
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Marriott or Hilton hot tub with a big drink <glub> Beverage: To-Go Bag™ DYKWIA: SSSS /rolleyes ☈ Date Night: Costco
Programs: Sea Shell Lounge Platinum, TSA Pre✓ Refusnik Diamond, PWP Gold, FT subset of the subset
Posts: 12,509
I'm for images being available in OMNI, just the way it's been with the rest of FT for a few years now. Honestly, I've never understood why this is an issue for some folks, especially with all the options available -
My sole internet connection has been a cellular modem for my laptop for eight years now, about the same time that WAP browsers started showing up on handsets. Back then, 1xRTT seemed to be about as fast as a 56k dialup. When EVDO started rolling out in 2005 it was a vast improvement. Now 4G services are rolling out.
For international travel, I can rent a USB modem from XCom Global for $13 per day, unlimited bandwidth. (Great service, BTW
^)
So, in 2011, I'm not sure how much a concern viewing images on a website should be.
Excellent question; there may very well be a way to block any images in the OMNI forums if one desires that.
- Disable images
- The "Report Bad Post" button
- The "ignore poster" feature
- Don't click on threads that have the word "bikini" in the title
- You're at work, what are you doing goofing off in OMNI anyway? Now get out of here before I throw my desk at you!
The target audience of FT are frequent travelers. As such, they are far more likely to be accessing this board from mobile devices than the average Internet user. FT needs to be bandwidth-conscious.
A single image, even a small one, can take as much data as pages and pages of text postings. The mobile FTer with a sketchy connection (for whatever reason - maybe in-flight, maybe crappy hotel WiFi, maybe expensive roaming pay as you go in a foreign country) will have to choose between choking on the data stream or missing out on the context of postings with images.
A single image, even a small one, can take as much data as pages and pages of text postings. The mobile FTer with a sketchy connection (for whatever reason - maybe in-flight, maybe crappy hotel WiFi, maybe expensive roaming pay as you go in a foreign country) will have to choose between choking on the data stream or missing out on the context of postings with images.
For international travel, I can rent a USB modem from XCom Global for $13 per day, unlimited bandwidth. (Great service, BTW
^)So, in 2011, I'm not sure how much a concern viewing images on a website should be.
Excellent question; there may very well be a way to block any images in the OMNI forums if one desires that.