Excellent points nsx and RichMSN. People will find ways to broaden their social experience. By providing a structure (via avatars, etc.) there is better control, versus members finding their own workarounds.

FlyerTalk needs to evolve, and I find it disheartening that some don't even want to consider an update to similies. Younger (ie: future FlyerTalkers) have much higher expectations for their online experiences, and basics like avatars, photos, and modern smilies are must-haves.

Obviously the FT focus is more targeted and richer than the empty chatter and gossip on most other sites (minus this thread of course) but there is no reason we can't keep "true to the mission" while also keeping up with the times.

.....

It's also telling that in 200+ threads there are so many misconceptions about the capabilities and customization. Everything is optional and anyone should have the ability to "ignore" avatars, smilies, etc. just as they can ignore users, links, and advertisements.

I believe that everyone posting on this thread completely understands the technology and the options.

We could always trial avatars in Omni. <insert evil grin smiley>

I asked this in a previous post and I feel compelled to ask again: what is gained by adding another 20 or 30 smilies? Or avatars? The Flyertalk interface, particularly now that the search functions have been improved, is not broken from a GUI standpoint.

This is scarily reminiscent of the dot-com bubble stuff from the late 1990s: it's the content people want. The presentation is just that. The "online experience" is meaningless next to the content.

I'm not a vbb expert, but I'm assuming that (as with most things), the more customization that's allowed on the server side=more CPU and resource utilization for the host. If I'm Randly (or Internet Brands, really), I'm asking myself if I'm losing valuable content contributors or eyeballs who click-thru on ads because I don't have every whizbang feature in the software turned on. I'm betting their answer is probably "no."

As much as I would like a larger variety of (non-animated) smilies, I do hate it when they are overused in a post as Randy has pointed out above. I don't suppose there is a way to limit the number of emoticons used in a post or it would have already been done.

hmmm, my new votes:
Avatars - firmly against
new smilies - on the fence

Somewhere in the back of my mind, I think there is a limitation already in place. Not sure if it an aggregate number, or just consecutive.

IIRC there used to be a limit of 5? I'm not sure one still exists now though, and there have been some posts in OMNI which tend to suggest if there is a limit, it's very large... but I can remember rationing my smilie use in a long post several years back!

Content is still king, but that mantra was so 5 years ago; today it's also about the overall "user experience". As people become more web-savvy they want to connect with others and express themselves in as many ways as they can.

Self-selected avatars are:

• a quick, effective method to communicate bio info about a user
• who they are,
• where they are coming from,
• are they young/old,
• male/female,
• so many messages can be conveyed with an image.

For me a quick look at an avatar will give me a lot of information that will help me respond to a post. I remember once finding myself wanting to give a snarky answer to someone asking what I thought was an odd security question about a hotel's location. When the person PM'd me and noted they were female, their question made a lot more sense and I felt stupid assuming they were male.

Again, what's been suggested is not music, videos, backgounds... just an OPTIONAL avatar image less than 1" x 2" in the profile box to the left of each post!!! and within the posts some fresh & updated smilies reflecting some of today's buzzwords as well as some travel specific ones.

I beg to differ with ClueByFour that the FT search function has been improved, but your thinking it is and wanting a pure BB gives me some insight into where you are coming from.

If you think presentation is "just that" and the "'online experience' is meaningless next to the content":

• Why is one of the most popular features on MySpace the ability to customize your own page, background, photos?
• Consider the face in Facebook and it's success.... (even among FlyerTalkers who are increasingly using it for "back-channel" communications and information sharing in ways that FlyerTalk currently can never do.)
• Why have the ability to change fonts, even colors of fonts?
• Why even bother with smilies?

I'm asking you to consider the evolution of FlyerTalk, baby steps here, but giving users some more visual options.

I'm of the opinion that we can add a few visual features and user customization of how they express themselves while still keeping the focus on quality discussion of miles and points. It's not an either or situation. We can and deserve both good content and a modern user experience.

The content and experience should drive the technology, not the other way around. I'll also point out that we're asking for non-moving/animated items here, have you seen how much video is streaming on websites today? The huge new ads that IB has implemented to the right and top of this post take up far more bandwidth/cpu/resources than any static similie or avatar will.

If I were IB (or any business), I'd look ahead. I'd be very worried about the quality content contributors who have a growing number of options to discuss miles & points. Even the much laughed at TripAdvisor is getting better and has a much larger user base. The bar is being raised everyday on other sites and FT should not stifle it's own improvement because a few are afraid of change.

Honestly, and only speaking for myself, this is not an issue about being afraid of change. I actually feel it positive that so many members do want to remain on topic for what FlyerTalk is. As for the modern experience? I rate modern as what is the "latest" piece of information i can use to make me a better traveler.

While these can be complicated discussions, the fact for me is i just want easy access to my travel-related information.

And while there are a few that identify the bias that any Moderators may have with this issue, I think they would be selling their own views short by not respecting the identity of these types of challenges. This combined pool of members sees almost every single thread posted daily on FlyerTalk, often through the eyes of its members, something that our average members have limited comprehension of what that might look like. As well, in this issue, I think our volunteers understand better than most that any change in this area has to work in the Dining forum as well as it will work in the US Airways forum and that of OMNI as well. Various forums of course, have differing degrees where the use of emoticons is used.

But again, it is not an issue about being afraid of change. Change for sake of change is often less well received than change for purpose. The question that lingers is really - what is the purpose that is not already being addressed?

Randy Petersen writes:

Just out of curiosity, how do you perceive that features that you would never even have to see could affect your access to travel-related information?

Because board admins and board mods don't always have the luxury of not having to look at things just because we don't want to?

The point has been made several times that many mods would feel obliged to have to view the damn things even if they didn't want to. I can't/wont' turn viewing signatures off because part of my job is to ensure that signatures do not break the TOS.

I honestly feel that assuming that any change will cause an additional burden on the moderators is somewhat disingenuous, and even if it were true (which we simply do not know), it would not be an adequate reason to dismiss the desires of whole other group of FlyerTalkers totally out of hand.

To begin with, we have in the past changed and even added to our available smilies with no adverse results as I recall. Secondly, what would be the problem with creating a group of image monitors? That would give everybody what they wanted.

The people who wanted images could see them. The people who didn't could turn them off. There would be no additional burden placed upon the existing modertors. Everybody could be happy.

I truly don't understand the source of conflict here. This is a situation where everyone's needs can be met if we are willing to work together in good faith.

Punki, has it ever occurred to you that every member on FlyerTalk also has the ability to turn off, if you will, other members? It's called the Ignore User function. Yet in every conflict among members (and that is the overwhelming problem of any Internet bulletin board) it is exactly that simple function which could have prevented the personalization of an opinion and resulting conflict. This is yet another strong and factual piece of information that you might be missing. As for the burden of moderators being "disingenuous" - frankly ignoring the combined experiences of these members who deal daily with those who don't "turn them off" is a huge mistake, one that you seem willing to take. As for image moderators, let me guess - no current moderators need apply? You seem to be advocating more government. An image monitor - I'd rather not become the laughing stock on the Internet with FlyerTalk. Actually, i did notice that there is at least one Internet Web site that has an image moderator. It is here at this link:
http://www.insideflyer.com/link/?731
The name of the Web site - LifelessPeople.com

And there really is no conflict here. What I see is no concrete example of a emoticon image being put forth that could not easily be supported by the existing ones.

We ignore that function.
All of us extreme enthusiasts live in deadly fear of MISSING SOMETHING.

I'll try to keep track of those instances over the next weeks. I frequently find the current emoticons lacking, and the remaining step will be put into words what I'm looking for in those instances.

Probably 10 or so well chosen additional smilies would suffice.

We actually currently do have 15 "well chosen" smilies which would seem to cover the gamut of acceptable expressions for those who cannot actually put their thoughts into words. I'm really quite confused as to what other terms of community that could not be currently gleemed from this list:
Thumbs up; Smilie; Confused; EK!; Mad; Roll Eyes (Sarcastic); Cool; Stick Out Tongue; Wink; Great idea; Big Grin; Star; Embarrassment; Thumbs down; Frown.

What we see so far, is not a single example that has been posted as to what else is really needed and a clear explanation of why that need is not being met with these 15 "well chosen" emoticons. If we're just saying that more is always better, then excuse me as i need to go hire 8,127 additional moderators because our needs are not being met by those volunteers we have. With that statement, I'm assuming that you'll just take me for my word?

Please let me clarify, I think that assuming there will in fact be problems, without any evidence to support that assumption, and then acting on that baseless assumption is disingenuous.

There did not appear to be any particular problems the last time we added smilies. I have talked with Mikel who reports that there have never been any problems that he knows of with FlyerTalkers uploading inppropriate images to the FT Photo Gallery. I have also communicated with the moderators of Trip Reports and they too report that they have never had any problems with FlyerTalkers uploading inappropriate images.

If we do eventually decide to allow avatars and appoint separate image monitors, whether or not those monitors are currently moderators is irrelevant. It really doesn't seem to me like there is any evidence that we will experience much abuse, and there appear to be plenty of existing moderator who want images to cover the job. Of course, it would also be nice to include some new folks as well. Every community is always strengthened when more people become actively involved.

Hey, I am perfectly happy with the current smilies and not a fan of avatars, but if they make other people happy, why not? There are no insurmountable stumbling blocks to any of these features. Again, if we all compromise a little, everybody can be happy.

Surely over the years, Randy, you must have noticed that my internal "Ignore User" function has always been engaged and working beautifully.