103 replies to this topic

[Orc Leader]

I like the size. I just use avatars to recognize other people so I don't have to read their names. >.>

[bendodge]

Do you think avatar sizes are too small?

No

[edmunn]

You already have 4096 pixels to fill up in your avatar, isn't that enough?

[Qwertyman]

If you still have dial up, I don't see how you can browse the rest of the internet. Most sites don't make their images bleeding-edge efficient, as pretty much everything is built for broadband nowadays. Look at any news site - they'll have several high resolution images along with some Flash image player that scrolls through the latest stories, and several ad players. I say that if you can't load GMC pages fast enough, switch to lo-fi mode.

[Mordi]

What if we made them 80x80 but disallowed animations?

[t3mp3st]

However they could just disable remote links to Avatars and make them all have the be uploaded, this would decrease page load, as it would not have to wait for images to load from 3rd party sites, it could also help with checking file size, as this is done by IPB on all uploaded avatars.

My 2 Pence XD

As I mentioned in my post, "because of some idiot in the past, uploading avatars to the forum again most likely won't happen either."

There was an exploit concerning images uploaded to the forum, and to remedy it uploading of avatars had to be disabled. Whether it's fixed in this newer version of IPB, I'm not sure? Probably, but really this whole discussion is hypothetical anyway... There is no discussion currently about changing avatar/signature limits, it really remains open at this point in that there is no harm in discussing it.

[Alecdude]

I find the avatar size fine. If they change it, so be it.

We don't need larger ones, an avatar is only a display picture, and has absolutly nothing to do with the forum's content itself. It only lags the forum even more because the forum must load the pictures.

I, myself, don't care for avatars, especailt thise ones that could give you seizures.

The size is fine. It's not like you're going to put the actual-sized "Mona Lisa" painting in it.

[Kairos]

Leave them at 64x64. I'm annoyed by larger avatars anyway, especially if they were animated.

[FredFredrickson]

Leave them at 64x64. I'm annoyed by larger avatars anyway, especially if they were animated.

I agree... visit other forums on the net and look at how messy and impossible to read they are. Avatars and sigs need to stay a certain size in order to keep the site easy on the eyes.

[Maxinston]

So your saying we cannot show off our cool avatars because of like 10 people who have dial-up connection? If someone have dial-up internet they can use the Lo-Fi Version of this forum, i mean why was it made if no one is using it? In other words if you don't want 100x100 avatar size this is because of:
1). You don't have a bigger version of the your avatar.
2). Your older then 60 and therefore you don't use avatars.
3). Your pissed off at everyone, so you want to spoil our fun.
As for the animations, there can be a size limit around 100 KB would be ok.
Peace-Out, Pepolshet

[desertdweller]

As I mentioned in my post, "because of some idiot in the past, uploading avatars to the forum again most likely won't happen either."

There was an exploit concerning images uploaded to the forum, and to remedy it uploading of avatars had to be disabled. Whether it's fixed in this newer version of IPB, I'm not sure? Probably, but really this whole discussion is hypothetical anyway... There is no discussion currently about changing avatar/signature limits, it really remains open at this point in that there is no harm in discussing it.

Aw, that's too bad. Most of the avatars on this forum I can't see, because I have K9 web protection, so all images from photobucket and imageshack and the like are mere red Xs. (I can see Fred's, Yourself's, and a few others) Thus, they (as users) tend to appear more recognizable and friendly, just because I can see their avatar, so if the IPB version allows the images to be uploaded onto the GMC and be more secure or whatever, I, for one, would be a very happy camper.

Just my $.02

Edited by desertdweller, 24 March 2008 - 04:38 PM.

[Natso]

So your saying we cannot show off our cool avatars because of like 10 people who have dial-up connection? If someone have dial-up internet they can use the Lo-Fi Version of this forum, i mean why was it made if no one is using it? In other words if you don't want 100x100 avatar size this is because of:
1). You don't have a bigger version of the your avatar.
2). Your older then 60 and therefore you don't use avatars.
3). Your pissed off at everyone, so you want to spoil our fun.
As for the animations, there can be a size limit around 100 KB would be ok.
Peace-Out, Pepolshet

Everything I bolded is either your personal opinion, or a generalized statement that you cannot backup. Who says people over 60 years old don't use avatars? Thats bull crap.

A large number of people are already shocked by the amount of changes to the GMC in just this past month. Changing too much more could provide a basis for more problems with them.

My avatar is 80x80. I like it.

I don't want a 100x100 avatar, and it is NOT because:
1). I don't have a bigger version of my avatar. (because I most certainly do)
2). Umm.... you're about 40 years off, mate.
3). It takes a whole lot to get me pissed off, and wanting to keep the GMC in a readable state is hardly a lets-spoil-people's-fun-by-not-letting-them-use-3600-more-pixels-in-their-avatar tactic.
And why would a 100KB avatar be ok? If everyone used it, pages would already be 2MB large, just from avatars. For people with dialup or slow high-speed connections, this is absolute murder.
The lo-fi version is good for archiving purposes, and currently most dialup-users are not forced to use it. If anyone around here is "wanting to spoil peoples fun", it's you, pepol, trying to sacrafice GMC's dialup users for 3600 pixels.

Cheers,
- Natso

[NakedPaulToast]

So your saying we cannot show off our cool avatars because of like 10 people who have dial-up connection? If someone have dial-up internet they can use the Lo-Fi Version of this forum, i mean why was it made if no one is using it? In other words if you don't want 100x100 avatar size this is because of:

Re-read the topic, this was but one consideration.

Ultimately, like all quotas, Avatar size is just another limitation that needs to be imposed because of constant abuse by members who should know better.

A day doesn't go by, where I don't report an oversize signature, huge avatar image size, or huge signature image size. Often by members who have been here for years, and there is no excuse for them not to know better. Cripes, how can it not be common sense for some of these idiots to not be aware that signature sizes that take up a half page is not desirable, or an image size greater than a mega-byte is unwanted.

I am constantly amazed that people get angry at the rules, or the staff for enforcing the rules, but seem to be completely oblivious towards the members who are abusing the rules and common sense.

Like most rules and limitations, they are there because they have to be there.

[Alert Games]

i think 80x80 is just fine.

[RedSlicer]

What if we made them 80x80 but disallowed animations?

Although some animations can be quite irritating, I think a lot of users would complain, if animations were disallowed.
Having no knowledge about what can be done and can't be done with forums, I can't see how one can prevent users from using animations other than by preventing the use of the .gif format, of which many people use for avatars and signatures.

About all the concern about slow loading times for people with dial-up and the like, I think it's a bit passé.
A lot of websites these days use lots of heavy graphics and flash animation. If one wants to use the Internet today, one must be aware of that.
It's like complaining about the production of new games, because they will not run on old computers.
I am aware a lot of people apparently still have slow connections; I just think they will have these problems many other places too, why should the GMC be any different? That's just my opinion of course.

If a larger image size won't mess up with the layout of the forum skin, I can't see much reason why we shouldn't consider an upgrade from 64x64 to 80x80 or even 100x100.

RedSlicer

Edited by RedSlicer, 24 March 2008 - 05:44 PM.

[Loaf]

BTW an answer to someone I currently live in New Zealand, where the poll was taken. It might not be a big country, but thats exactly it. If a small country like us can afford having broadband over dial up, the if England, America, and Asia can't then there is something odd going on...

[JakeX]

What it boils down to for me is that I think avatars any larger than the ones we have now would begin to get distracting.
Frankly, I really couldn't care less if that means you can't really make out the cute little forum image you found in some dirty corner of the internet and used as your avatar.

[AnSq]

A lot of websites these days use lots of heavy graphics and flash animation. If one wants to use the Internet today, one must be aware of that.
It's like complaining about the production of new games, because they will not run on old computers.
I am aware a lot of people apparently still have slow connections; I just think they will have these problems many other places too, why should the GMC be any different? That's just my opinion of course.

I agree, but I also think that bigger avatars would make the forum less readable. One thing that I like about this forum over others I've seen is that it's easy to read. There isn't a whole lot of random images getting in the way. The sigs can get big and annoying sometimes, but not too bad.

I would also like to point out that (as everybody should now) you can switch off images in posts (including avatars, smilies, and sigs) in the board settings.

I think it would be nice if the avatar size was increased, not too big, about 80x80 would be as big as I would like it, but I don't care all that much.

[Maxinston]

So your saying we cannot show off our cool avatars because of like 10 people who have dial-up connection? If someone have dial-up internet they can use the Lo-Fi Version of this forum, i mean why was it made if no one is using it? In other words if you don't want 100x100 avatar size this is because of:
1). You don't have a bigger version of the your avatar.
2). Your older then 60 and therefore you don't use avatars.
3). Your pissed off at everyone, so you want to spoil our fun.
As for the animations, there can be a size limit around 100 KB would be ok.
Peace-Out, Pepolshet

Everything I bolded is either your personal opinion, or a generalized statement that you cannot backup. Who says people over 60 years old don't use avatars? Thats bull crap.

A large number of people are already shocked by the amount of changes to the GMC in just this past month. Changing too much more could provide a basis for more problems with them.

My avatar is 80x80. I like it.

I don't want a 100x100 avatar, and it is NOT because:
1). I don't have a bigger version of my avatar. (because I most certainly do)
2). Umm.... you're about 40 years off, mate.
3). It takes a whole lot to get me pissed off, and wanting to keep the GMC in a readable state is hardly a lets-spoil-people's-fun-by-not-letting-them-use-3600-more-pixels-in-their-avatar tactic.
And why would a 100KB avatar be ok? If everyone used it, pages would already be 2MB large, just from avatars. For people with dialup or slow high-speed connections, this is absolute murder.
The lo-fi version is good for archiving purposes, and currently most dialup-users are not forced to use it. If anyone around here is "wanting to spoil peoples fun", it's you, pepol, trying to sacrafice GMC's dialup users for 3600 pixels.

Cheers,
- Natso

I bet that most avatars will be around 20KB, who said that everyone will start using 100KB avatars anyway, i only said that it would be fair if it would be the maximum avatar size allowed, i mean how much people have dialup connection in GMC (i think its only me because i use my cell phone to browse GMC)? Its the same as if you would wipe out the whole server because some ethiopian guy doesn't have internet.

[grandhighgamer]

That's a rather dumb analogy.
20-30KB is FINE. It stops abuse dead it in's tracks.
If it was 100kb limit then I'd have to disable avatars