IMHO, Jenbel, all decisions we make should be based on how they affect the community, not on how they affect us personally.

If having pictures of community members would enhance the community, then we should take a serious look at overcoming whatever stumbling blocks may be in the way of making them possible. In this instance those stumbling blocks are easy to overcome.

-Visual clutter can be overcome with an on/off switch.

-I have great faith in the intelligence of the FT Community. I am certain they will be able to find the on/off switch if they don't like to look at other people's pictures.

-Those members intent on mischief, will always find a way to create it. That is why we have moderators.

-It is the responsibility of all of us who wish to serve the community to do so freely, not to balk because we don't like a certain aspect of our job. If there is a moderator who can't bear looking at smilies, avatars, or flags, if we should decide to use them, it would probably be in the best interest of FT if that person resigned and was replaced by a another who had no such reservations.

-A head shot photo, is a head shot photo. We all have them on our driver's license and passports. How difficult can it be determine if a head shot is a heat shot? Surely far simpler that deciding whether there has been an excess use of smilies, which is truly a subjective decision.

-Yes, you are quite right, I do expect that some currently unidentified FlyerTalker would be happy to step up to the job of cropping photos if that became an issue.

Yes, being able to put a face with the name would go a long way toward building community, just as showing a flag indicating the posters nation, would help build greater understanding. All to the good of FlyerTalk.

On the few other boards that I visit, the avatars become very quickly tiresome when the thread is two people going back and forth. Maybe a link in the profile to a photo, but not in every single post.

I still like the little country flags and airline logos. ^

^^^ Well-stated. The cons far outweigh the pros.

As has been stated previously, less is more. And simplicity is elegance.


:confused: Sounds like a pretty democratic way to run things: If you don't like something, you should resign in favor of someone who is not so offended/concerned/bothered/etc.


Isn't there already a place on FT where people can post pictures of themselves---if they would like to do so---so that others can put a face with a (user)name? How would adding avatars add to what already exists?

Regarding airline logos...I'm not an IP lawyer, but does the term "trademark violation" concern anyone?

I have to agree with the majority here and utter what they say. I think the flag idea is a really good one (although not IP tracking but rather whatever someone chooses to display), since FlyerTalk is truly a global and diverse community. The only question I have is whether it would be better to allow them to be changed whenever by the member (which I know someother boards have, and it gets very tiresome very quick since some change it everyday), only every so often, or only once, which doesn't seem like enough if someone moves.

I am also not a fan of the avatars. One thing I like about FT is the relatively simple look it has and that it's easy to browse. I really like the idea, though, of maybe a database or gallery which is exclusively for posting headshots/pics of members.

uncertaintraveler writes:

I don't understand the choice of the word "democratic" in this instance, but yes, resigning from a job if you don't like a certain aspect of the work required is a very logical solution. This is especially true in volunteer work where there is no economic downside to offering such a resignation.

If, for instance, it was decided that all TalkBoard members were required to show a photo avatar, and I decided that I didn't want to do that, then my best choice would be to resign and give way to someone who had no such reservation.

You are correct that there is a FlyerTalk photo gallery, but it is very poorly organized and does not serve the purpose of identifying individual members. We did have such a photo gallery way back in the very beginning of FlyerTalk and it may even have been alphabetical, but if those photos still exist I can't find them.

Having personal ID photos will go a long way toward helping us know, remember and understand one another better.

Punki, most of your recent posts have been concerned with downplaying the downside of avatars (I'll leave flags aside for this post), arguing that few arguments had been put forward against them, which, imo, Jenbel clearly refuted.
I would like to turn now to the upside, and what you see as the advantages. Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that your support boils down to two arguments:
1) good to put a face to a handle (for DO recognition purposes, etc...)
2) Knowing where someone comes from might facilitate comprehension (a 70 year old woman does not see things from the same perspective as a 20 year old man)

As to 1), I do not see how this cannot be achieved by enabling photos in profiles, which would provide you what you want without any of the downside summarised by Jenbel

As to 2), apart from the fact that a photo in profile would enable to you to access that additional info if you wanted it (and the poster of course wanted it too), the premise seems to me debatable. It could equally be argued that it might distort comprehension by distracting attention from what is being said to what the person looks like, and let the reader be affected by their own, conscious or unconscious, prejudices and assumptions (you know the same kind that lead queue combers to challenge "unsuitable" persons from the First class queue...). Visual appearance provides very little information on the person's background and where they come from and might be equally misleading.
Do you really think that the quality of political debate has been increased by the increased focus on image in the latter half of the 20th century?

As to mods duties, it seems to me that you dismiss the arguments rather casually. "Faith" in FTers "worth their salt" is all very fine, but being "worth one's salt" is not a condition of FT membership. There is no reason to assume that FTers are an especially virtuous (or wicked for that matter) bunch and experience does show us that FTers do breach ToS.
I am not convinced that the advantages that you expect from allowing avatars, which can moreover be secured differently, outweigh the extra duty that you want to impose on moderators and the loss of enjoyment of FT that would result for those of them who like their FT avatar-free.
There is a cost to enforcement, and that cost has to figure in the balance sheet of whether or not to go for it.
I would be very sad to lose somebody with the talent and dedication of, eg, Jenbel as moderator for very little gain, if any, in return.

So how will seeing my "personal ID photo" help you understand me better? :confused: Would you prefer to judge me on my photo or my posts?

Bingo! ^

^ ^

Excellent observation.

And that's one of the reasons I'm leery of avatars.

I can buy into expanding the base of smilies as I'm both a user and proponent of them. To reiterate what I said in the OP:

There seems to also be some support expressed in this thread for allowing national flag images. I could support that as long as there was an ability to turn them off if they grew tiresome.

You guys understand that avatars aren't mandatory, right? Because all the arguments against them seem to assume that you have to put one on your profile.

It isn't required.

I'm glad the TB is back to discussing issues of such pressing importance.

I must say that I'm surprised at the heavy resistance to adding profile photos or avatars.

While FlyerTalk is a (glorified) Bulletin Board with the focus on it's content (miles & points) I do agree that it has become a bit stale on the visual & feature front. I think an image can help improve the user experience.

Sure Facebook, MySpace, Bebo, etc. are social sites, but FlyerTalk can only thrive if it takes some cues from them in terms of features such as profile photos, avatars and yes, more smilies, poke icons, etc.

I know a lot of you (sans lucky9876coins) fall into the 30+ crowd, as do I, but thinking about the future and keeping FlyerTalk competitive outweighs the argument that some might not understand how these features work or their implications. As alanw has pointed out these features are optional, minimal on load-times and should be treated as "content" like anything else subject to Moderation and the TOS. Let's have options!

To be clear, I'm not advocating crazy MySpace style clutter or page (skin) modifications, but a few simple elements to improve the user experience: We're taking about a 3 cm x 3 cm space for a photo or image underneath the post count, plus a flag icon possibly under the member status. Again, restrictions such as the image being static (no flashing or animating) will keep things from getting to wild. If folks really object, then I'd say add the photo to the pull down list once you click on the member name.

(if you really want me to stir the pot, ask about my ideas for friend lists, feedback and testimonials in our profiles)

Why the sarcasm, FewMiles? If you have any issues of "pressing importance" which this issue is prevening us from discussing please let us know, but in the meantime there's no need for an attitude.:) Posts like that add nothing to this discussion.

Has it been agreed (I know nothing's been agreed, but does anyone dissent from the position) that should any form of avatar / picture function be added, it will be possible for members to set a preference for these not to be displayed (as with signatures at the moment)?

I can't imagine why anyone would object to on on/off switch. Heck as far as I am concerned there could be a switch that turned all of FlyerTalk black and white and hid all icons of every kind if that is within the abilities of the software.

How very dare you include some of us to that "club"! :mad: ;)

I too would be interested to hear if anyone dissents in this regard.