I'm not a VB wizard, but I'm almost certain that #1 is technically possible. I've seen it done on other IBBs before - attachments and inline images don't appear until you log in. The question is whether that can be done on a forum by forum basis.

I'd take it one step further - you need a relatively small number of posts (to avoid the worst of drive-by spammers/trolls) to be able to post images. Another IBB (that runs vB) I'm a member of requires 5 posts before you can use the URL tag, so I know it's feasible to restrict tag usage by post count.

A New TOS Section?
 

[I am guilty of cross-posting. I also placed this post in the private TalkBoard debate forum]

I haven't voted on the motion yet.

But based on the posts in this thread, it seems like (nearly) everyone thinks allowing images is a good idea, but some are concerned about the need for consistent standards.

To me this is something way too big and important to shove down anyone's throat, so I circled back around to some moderators of image-enabled forums as well as some of the folks expressing concerns about the proposal and picked their brains for ideas as to what could make images work while giving moderators better marching orders and keeping FT as clutter free as possible.

Here's what I've come up with. Some of the folks I asked haven't gotten back to me yet, but I figure I've got enough to put this out there and see if a motion that included this sort of amendment to the TOS would have universal support.

So:

- Is this an approach that everyone can get behind, and

- Are these TOSs and TOS clarifications adequate to make everyone comfortable. If not, what else/other would you like to see?

I have no pride of authorship here (and in fact all I really did is steal everyone elses' ideas and put them together ;)) so feel free to rip it apart if you think that's what it needs.

Also, I'm thinking it'd be good if someone could link to this post from the private moderators forum, but I don't know if that is appropriate or even if a private moderator forum exits ;). But moderator input would be good, I think.



Proposed New TOS Section:
EMBEDDED IMAGES

Embedded images are covered by these and all other FlyerTalk Terms of Service, and images in breach of them will be immediately deleted.

The purpose of allowing images on FlyerTalk is to allow posters to convey information, facts or experiences in a visual format. Please only embed images for this purpose.

Content: All images must comply with the TOS. Obscene or Offensive Language/Material and copyright TOS provisions are emphasized with regard to images. If you do not have permission to use an image or if the image is not 100% ‘work safe’ then do not post the image.

FlyerTalk strives to remain a sleek and clutter-free IBB. So the most critical TOS with regard to images is: stay on topic. Please keep your images on topic. If a posted image does not add something relevant and useful to the post/conversation the post and/or image may be deleted.

Images are not smilies. Images that attempt to convey an emotion rather than add information will be deleted. Images used to tease or mock other posters will not be tolerated.

Animated and/or moving images are not allowed and will be deleted.

Privacy: Particular emphasis for images will be placed on protecting the privacy of other FlyerTalkers. If you do not have the express permission of another FlyerTalker to post his or her image do not do so.

Ability to post: Posters must have minimum of 20 posts in post-count-qualifying forums before being permitted to post images.

Size: Generally, images should be as small as possible to make the point intended. A maximum width of 640 pixels and maximum height of 480 pixels allows users to view an image within a single post on a typical screen. Images larger than this may be deleted.

Location: Images may only be posted in the body of a post. Images in post headings, signature lines or anywhere other than in the body of a post will be deleted and could result in disciplinary action.

Hotlinking: Images should be embedded from a site over which you have control. If you want to post an image please make sure it is emanating from your photo storage account or server and not from a site or server over which you have no control. Posters are responsible for the content of images embedded in their posts whether it is the image intended to be and/or originally posted or not.

I voted no on the current motion - however, I'm not against images altogether, I just didn't think the current motion was worded properly & there were too many other concerns that needed to be addressed. I like what you've done above, Koko - it does help address some of the concerns. ^

As for number of images per post, so long as they are all relevant and add information I don't think there is a problem with having more than one or even more than a few.

Here's an example that is pretty close to home for me. There are 10 images in that post, but hopefully they are all appropriate and helpful.

Koko - Your TOS proposals are very good and addresses the "legalities" of the Image issues but the practical issues of people posting "inappropriate" images still remains.

I will call other mods attention to the discussion here ;) (Edit: woops already done)

Koko,

Good work! I agree with you that I would not limit the number of images in a post.

In addition, I still think the motion needs to be clearer on whether or not this is a moderator option for implementation. At least two different TB members see the motion differently but are voting on the same worded motion. I know as a moderator I would read the motion as not giving me flexibility to determine whether the feature is activated. My job is to enforce the TOS as approved by the TB and images are covered by the TOS. I do not believe I should be inserting my judgment to override a vote of the member elected board.

William

Koko - Awesome job.

Good stuff, Koko. That helps a lot, imo. ^

That said, it still does not address the point whether we should dogmatically assume that one size fits all or embrace diversity and adaptation to the particular needs of particular fora.

I'm still waiting for positive arguments as to why absolute uniformity should be regarded as a good thing, notwithstanding the fact that our experience suggests the contrary.

Poster A posts a link to a particular picture.

Poster B, in another forum, posts the same link.

Poster B has his link removed, and receives a warning letter that the picture is in bad taste and a TOS violation. Poster B replies, pointing out that Poster A gave the link two weeks earlier and it is still up. Poster A never gets the warning and the link is allowed to remain.

Obviously, the identical picture can not be in bad taste, and a TOS violation, when linked to from one forum but not from another. (There was never a claim that the link was off topic in either forum and, no, Omni was not involved.)

It is detrimental to FT to have members subject to disciplinary actions in one forum when the same action is perfectly acceptable in another. It makes it impossible for members to really know what can, and what can not, get them suspended.

(Incidentally, the above example is not theoretical. It actually happened. Details as to what forums, etc, the links appeared in are irrelevant.)

The underlying question is whether a particular feature (images) should be uniformly enabled in all fora or whether the needs and concerns of particular fora should be accommodated. Question of disciplinary actions are therefore 100% irrelevant: if you cannot physically post images in LGBT, then you can't and no issue of disciplinary action for posting in LGBT can arise.

Again, I ask: do you think that thread prefixes should be used in all fora or none at all and do you find it highly objectionable that some use them and some don't? If so, why?

I think it is a very good idea to have thread prefixes in all forums. However, it has never been a TB decision and thus is not relevant to this issue.

Au contraire, this is precisely the point: should we have exactly the self-same features in all fora, regardless of the needs, styles, characteristics and concerns of particular fora, or is there room for recognising different needs and concerns? The only "reason" that you have put forward is: "I think it is a very good idea", without putting forward any justification as to why you think that systematic uniformity on everything is a good thing.
Surely you must have a reason. It cannot be pure dogmatism, can it?

Well I think that your example shows that its very hard to achieve total uniformity across the board. Note that I have no knowledge of the example that you raised. But I do see two issues involved here. One being the "culture" of the respective forums - while it would be great if all forums has the same "culture", they don't (and probably never will). Also, moderators are individuals and aside from the Senior Mods, very few moderate more than 2-3 forums. And this is also why I'm opposed to allowing images across the board - GLBT would likely be somewhat more lenient in what is acceptable while the same image would not be acceptable in one of the "core" forums.

And there are forums where I find images totally irrelevant (Coupon Connection, SPAM, here in Talkboard Topics amongst others) aside from GLBT which I still feel has a strong probability of having posts with "unacceptable" images.

You are correct that some photos from, for example, a trendy gay club in some travel destination or another might be perfectly appropriate in the GLBT forum but might cause posters some trepidation on, say, the religious travel forum for example. And perhaps even vice-versa. ;) I've struggled with your concerns but don't have a good answer other than leaving those questions in the capable hands of the forum moderators. After all, some WORDS posted in the GLBT forum might not be appreciated in the RT forum and vice versa. And if the images are strictly required to add relevant information then I'm thinking that narrows down potential problems.


I dunno, a photo of the coupon in question might help make a trade more attractive. Photos of how things work on other IBBs might make sense in the TB Topics forum. It might be a stretch, but it's possible. And so long as the images have to be strictly on-topic I don't see it becoming a problem.

Would it help if we add language to the proposed TOS amendment that says something like "In forums where the ability to embed images is chronically abused, management reserves the right to disable images in that forum temporarily or permanently"?

Sorry to barge in. I have to admit that I didn't read this entire thread. I can summarize my opinion on images within posts very easily. First...in many posts (regardless of forum)...images are valuable. Therefore restricting images to certain forums is IMHO a potential waste of assets. Second, FlyerTalk has always been (and should forever be) a community where the spirit of the 'law' always matters more than the letter of the law. That being said, let moderators decide which images violate FT's TOS on a case-by-case basis. If it blows up into a huge issue, then establish clear standards. To me, FlyerTalk has always been about the spirit of the TOS, and not about the specifics. YMMV :)