very odd...

really, you're going to go there?
 

jeez....I'm glad I voted the way i did for TB.

I'm sorry it didn't turn out how you wanted.

Well, by way of explanation (and this is my perspective and opinion only), every time the idea of images has come up in the past, some posters and especially moderators have fretted that it will create problems, make their jobs harder, etc.

This concern was expressed more by at least one of the moderators of a Special Interest forum, so ultimately those forums were left out...

I don't know if anyone still has those concerns any more or not, but my feeling is that every time we allow images they turn out to be a very positive thing for FT. And that that will likely be the case in the Special Interest forums as well.

If a wolf actually shows up this time, we can turn them off in a particular forum.

Bolding mine: Imho, if a moderator (or moderators) have a concern (or concerns) about this subject they should be posting here for the general membership to read

I'd support it.

Interesting opinion, were you against talking pictures back in the day? :p Pictures are hardly superfluous, although by not embracing other forms of media this website will become superfluous!

This is a change I support if only because FTers should expect that the approaches considered acceptable in one part of FT should be considered acceptable across all of FT.

I'm okay with images in all forums. It's time IMHO to allow it. ^

As the moderator of the Travel with Pets forum I would support images in the special interest forums.

It appears that rushing to a motion is what happened, This discussion thread had only been open one day before the motion was made/seconded and the vote began. It would have been nice to see a longer discussion period for votes like these, especially since there's no urgent requirement for its implementation. Not everyone who would have an opinion on the motion can log into FT on a daily basis.

I made the motion. Koko merely seconded it.

The response in the first 24 hours from the public has been overwhelmingly positive. The moderators of the forums (where items were posted) either are very positive or haven't posted or responded (and I did check that they were active in the 24 hours before I made a public motion).

This isn't a big change, IMO. To me, it's merely correcting an oversight. And there's still 14 days of voting for someone to come along and make a compelling argument why this shouldn't be passed.

According to the guidelines something has to be discussed for 48 hours in the private TB forum before it can be brought up for a motion. This met that guideline.

FWIW - I agree with you. I was a bit surprised to see it got brought to motion only 24 hours after the image thread was started. There's no urgency to it. Perhaps we need to amend the guidelines to say something has to be open in the public TB forum for 48 hours too ;)

However, once something is brought to a motion & voting begins there is a public announcement across all TB forums to give people a heads up & directs them to this forum. Voting is 2 weeks or until all TB members have voted, so FTers have a few days at least to provide input before TB members vote.

Cheers.

There are 4 forums in the entirety of FT that did not allow images before I got the PM last week. I would've been thrilled had the CD simply flipped the switch and turned the images on, considering most of the TB thought that was the status quo. I, personally, had no idea one way or the other. The idea that OMNI and OMNI/PR allowed images, but Travel with Children didn't, can only been seen as an oversight.

I know a moderator of GLBT had some misgivings about images in that forum, but I'm not sure that's a good enough reason to have a weird inconsistency in such a policy.

I, too, had assumed they were already turned on FT-wide.