Input/Feedback Requested On Expanded “Smilie” Choices For FlyerTalk
#91
In Memoriam




Join Date: May 1998
Location: Seattle
Programs: Ephesians 4:31-32
Posts: 10,690
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.
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.
#92
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: DEN
Programs: UA 1MM, Delta Plat
Posts: 11,224
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. ^
I still like the little country flags and airline logos. ^
#93
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 9,740
Let me summarise, since you seem to be ignoring a lot of people's genuine concerns:
- avatars create visual clutter
- not all members will realise that there is an off-switch for avatars, just as not all members realise that there is an off-switch for signatures (and how long have we had that feature
- it's too easy to misuse/abuse the avatar feature - not a good thing for building community
- you expect moderators to be the ones to police avatars - which means not all people could turn them off. For example several of the mods who have responded, including myself, don't want to have to look at them, but would have to...
- you expect moderators to be the ones to police avatars - while ignoring their legitimate concerns about having to subjectively decide on what is and isn't allowed (your talk of automatic suspension resolved back to moderator discretion when given a direct example)
- you expect unnamed people to give of their time at your order to help people technologically unable to upload
vs
It would be nice. Seeing someone's picture would help foster community.
- avatars create visual clutter
- not all members will realise that there is an off-switch for avatars, just as not all members realise that there is an off-switch for signatures (and how long have we had that feature
- it's too easy to misuse/abuse the avatar feature - not a good thing for building community
- you expect moderators to be the ones to police avatars - which means not all people could turn them off. For example several of the mods who have responded, including myself, don't want to have to look at them, but would have to...
- you expect moderators to be the ones to police avatars - while ignoring their legitimate concerns about having to subjectively decide on what is and isn't allowed (your talk of automatic suspension resolved back to moderator discretion when given a direct example)
- you expect unnamed people to give of their time at your order to help people technologically unable to upload
vs
It would be nice. Seeing someone's picture would help foster community.
^^^ Well-stated. The cons far outweigh the pros.
As has been stated previously, less is more. And simplicity is elegance.
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. Regarding airline logos...I'm not an IP lawyer, but does the term "trademark violation" concern anyone?
#94
FlyerTalk Evangelist




Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 23,999
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.
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.
#95
In Memoriam




Join Date: May 1998
Location: Seattle
Programs: Ephesians 4:31-32
Posts: 10,690
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.
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.
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.
#96
FlyerTalk Evangelist


Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,874
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.
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.
Last edited by NickB; Dec 3, 2007 at 8:26 am Reason: typos
#97
Moderator: LGBTQ+ Travel, India-based Airlines and India; FlyerTalk Evangelist


Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Asia
Programs: Yes!
Posts: 15,582
Would you prefer to judge me on my photo or my posts?
Originally Posted by NickB
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 provide very little information on the person's background and where they come from and might be equally misleading.
Originally Posted by NickB
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 be figure in the balance sheet of whether or not to go for it or not.
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.
There is a cost to enforcement, and that cost has to be figure in the balance sheet of whether or not to go for it or not.
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.
#98
Original Poster
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist

Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Southern California
Programs: DL: 3.8 MM, Marriott: Lifetime Titanium
Posts: 24,575
"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.
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:
Smilies are not solely for entertainment value. As FlyerTalk increases it’s international reach, the judicious use of smilies can cut across language barriers and promote more effective communications.
pretty much means
in whatever language you speak. Plus even when we all speak the same language, the written word is not nearly as expressive as the spoken word. Sometimes smilies can substitute for the inflection or gesture we might add to a spoken sentence.
pretty much means
in whatever language you speak. Plus even when we all speak the same language, the written word is not nearly as expressive as the spoken word. Sometimes smilies can substitute for the inflection or gesture we might add to a spoken sentence.
#99


Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: BCN
Programs: BA Silver · VY apologist · IB up and coming
Posts: 8,706
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.
It isn't required.
#100
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: FTFOE
Programs: TalkBoard: We discuss / ad nauseum things that mean / so very little
Posts: 10,225
I'm glad the TB is back to discussing issues of such pressing importance.
#101
FlyerTalk Evangelist




Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: check swarm
Programs: DL DM & 2MM, AS Gold, SPG LT Titanium, Hyatt Globalist, Cava Sun member
Posts: 14,439
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)
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)
#102
FlyerTalk Evangelist




Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 23,999
Posts like that add nothing to this discussion.
#103




Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 4,135
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)?
#104
In Memoriam




Join Date: May 1998
Location: Seattle
Programs: Ephesians 4:31-32
Posts: 10,690
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.
#105
Moderator: LGBTQ+ Travel, India-based Airlines and India; FlyerTalk Evangelist


Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Asia
Programs: Yes!
Posts: 15,582

Originally Posted by Wingnut
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)?

