LONGECITY

Lipex... appreciate the feedback. Generally agree on 1 & 2. Not sure about some parts of 3, but understand / agree that excessive scroll is a problem to be avoided by good design. I'd be helpful if you could show me other forums for comparison.

I vote for keeping avatars. I think discussions will be harder to follow, especially for people who skim threads to see who said what. And it takes away quite a bit of the personality.

I think file size is probably a main concern. As such, I'm not against animated avatars, as long as they are relatively small.

(And yes, I have a conflict of interest, because my avatar is animated. In my defense, I spent quite a bit of effort to keep the file size under 50K, not bad for 18 or 24 frames.)

I liked the avatars.

I got to know people based on the pictures by their post.

Interaction between people is much more difficult to see this way, and when following a thread it's a major bonus to know who's following up on what arguments, information etc. It seems to take much more time without avatars making it harder to follow and less friendly to people. Especially those who don't know all of the people here. Aka new members. Isn't this counter productive? As long as the picture aren't offensive or large what's the real harm?

Is is possible to have the Avatars, Signatures, Rank, Reputations, Personal Message (under the Avatar), etc. in the general forums, but in the management forums have all these fun things off?

That would be the best of both worlds. Kick back in a tee-shirt in the general forums but still look professional in the management forums.

Most forum Avatars are 100x100. :biggrin:

i think we should keep the avatars.

Makes the place more friendly.

It makes the place feel like 1984



ps couldn't find the clip that wasn't a mac commercial

Within "Controls" under "Options" under "Board Settings" members can choose to see an avatar-less forum view... an option that has been around for a while.

I didn't express myself correctly. What I had in mind was that it should be possible to hide single specified avatars, as well.
Edited by siberia, 09 December 2007 - 04:49 PM.

Soon changing back to avatars for members... w/in the next few days at least. The Apple 1984 commercial tipped the scale... of course. However, I do think it worthwhile to consider limiting most avatars to non-moving. As mentioned by others, scrolling down a page and seeing a montage of moving avatars can be more distracting than helpful. Also, we could be a little more aggressive to allow avatars that truly do contribute more to the community feel, w/ preferences given to photos of real person, or constructively minded, non-garish avatars... lending more to the definition: ăv'ə-tär' temporary manifestation or aspect of a continuing entity.

>>> I got to know people based on the pictures by their post.

This is why people need to stick with one and leave it alone for years. People who change often unwittingly have to restart their branding with the community again. There are people her who change a lot, and their posts don't hold nearly as much weight with me because with every change, my mind treats their following posts as if it's from a new person.

Lipex, can you please define what "garish" means?

would that happen to be anything that you find unsavory?

for what it's worth, here's my full avatar while we're on the subject

Without avatars, this site losses 80% of it's community feel and personality.

My thoughts as well. One of the main functions of avatars is personality.

This thread should then be worded

"Personality free - eliminating redundant info, bringing greater focus to forum posts"

The information in an avatar Bruce is not redundant IMO and it appears that this view is consistent across the board.

As mentioned, avatars will return...

1. Eliminate animated avatars.
2. Censor garish avatars.
3. Slim down the excessive border thickness; several connective broad planes and bars of unused colored space with numerous shading and line weights kills the enthusiasm for scrolling("travelling") that the simple, light-weight, yet immersive visual language engendered by the old forum style. All mentioned elements don't gel in a visually logical or pleasing manner and it distracts the eye. You've wrapped a focally dispersing optical illusion around the plane of textual content and it needs editing. And the MOST IMPORTANT PART is that it takes more mouse-wheel clicks to move the page and with all this extra dreary weight to move - it - is - ex-haus-t-ing!
4. Those "Post Icons" are ugly as well (cLuNkY__). My eye jumps to that damn "Uncle Sam Wants YOU!" pic and I feel threatened every time...stop....looking at...pointing at me, damn it!

edit: addition

5. I realized what was making me feel queasy: too many similar shades/tones of the same two colors. Quick count is eleven shades(less the gradient panels). Subtle contrast can be indicative of refined taste but this doesn't accomplish that. Queasy. Wait, you're trying to get rid of the visually sensitive derelicts, aren't you? Just don't make the mistake of trying this configuration out in flesh tones.

Bruce Klein -
A) I would like to expand on #2: by censor I mean that the unpleasant elements have some sort of blur, pixellation, or "censored/lude/filthy/indecent/fugly"-box placed over the offending elements. As the user scrolls down the page these blots try to keep pace with the movement chasing behind in effort to keep decency in the forums.
B) Expanding on #3: All that need to be done is decrease the width of the band within which the poster/user-name is seated and also put the Reply/Quote/Top buttons inside the lefthand margin -above- the thin black line punctuating the end of the post's allotted space. That would save space and keep the referential connection of buttons-to-post more clearly defined. May as well put something in all of that dead space under the username.
C)This one, which I can't get to work even though the bubble is completely and evenly filled with a #2 pencil: http://www.imminst.o...cons/icon10.gif
D) Forget the color issues. Nitpicking. Fyi, most forums are ugly until you break them in.

karomesis -
In another regal pronouncement today Director Klein has set the status of the word "garish" to *Official* by precedent in a strikingly familial utterance as related to the exact contextual framing I proposed in my flaccid armchair diktat. I will not be lambasted by a ludicrous mockerous plimp with his silly cart-toon comedy bit trying to usurp my fertile stream of concern that flows directly into Herr Director's ear by lampooning but a single adjective in my discourse! Coup d'etat trounced! {throws fistful of papers down to the floor; women and children watch in reverence as men raise to their feet in applause; tickertape parade breaks out; sailors kiss women while their husbands obliviously continue applauding; children pickpocket government issue pocketwatches from sailors and bring them to me, my little kiddies; liplex melts them down into shells for the 16in. battleship cannons for a devastating surprise attack with full popular support on karomesis' nation which ends with the spreading of salt upon the rubbled fallows}
Don't Mess With Tejas!
Edited by liplex, 11 December 2007 - 02:50 AM.

Thanks, liplex.. will keep in mind, and have changed emoticon from uncle same to more generic gov image:

Another perspective:

Lose the navigation-by-directory-tree-only setup. It makes me feel like I'm in solitary confinement, walking the halls, seeing only one character at a time like in a text-based rpg after plinking my coin into the private peepshow slot, the shrieks and sighs of my fellow forumites heard only in the distance. If you trim the graphics intensive borders for faster loading and also prioritize content loading before everything else(if that's even possible) then I don't mind waiting a for borders to load while I read other posts either in the thread of the moment or one in another tab.

Another apt analogy: it feels like going back to DOS after growing up on Windows.

This "nav-tree"style stymies the community aspect by 1) necessitating that each and every post be clicked(time/effort consuming), 2) depends upon a prior familiarity of all members involved in a post if they so choose to ignore or search out anyone(more time clicking each person to build a knowledge of each member), 3) this last point also limits easy access to perhaps variants in character and experience of any one member forcing an "all or nothing" approach to developing a personal opinion base about members which -really- kills the community vibe (forces the long-tail). You'll lose members because it will take so much time/effort to become acquainted. Just let it run down like a wide open waterfall.





...hmm...and Uncle Sam is looking at me right now...[no reply nec.]
Edited by liplex, 11 December 2007 - 03:21 AM.

No avatars?!?! But why?????


BTW the site on http://imminst.org is dead...

Lose the navigation-by-directory-tree-only setup.

You may need to change your setting to "Standard" by clicking on "Options" above right.

I see the avatars are up, I can see the benefits of both ways...

But I'm posting to ask if the buttons can be changed, possibly have them be a brighter white, just so they stand out?

I'm guessing that if I was a newbie, I'd find it hard to read them.

You may need to change your setting to "Standard" by clicking on "Options" above right.

we might want to loose the directory tree option, at least for the time being. Some people seem to be getting trapped in it

But I'm posting to ask if the buttons can be changed, possibly have them be a brighter white, just so they stand out?

I'm guessing that if I was a newbie, I'd find it hard to read them.

Good suggestion. I would have to second that. I have to squint at times myself.

Shannon, Chris... i plan to change the buttons, thanks.

awe thanks, can we get the applauding smiley and kiss blowing smiley while we are at it (but the smilies-- we had to do :smile: then it went back to : ) , but it is putting the weird border stuff afterwards, not sure if anything can be done about that? )

ok, I edited in to say that they appear to be working now without the extra border stuff....
Edited by Shannon, 11 December 2007 - 07:21 PM.

How exactly does one set up their avatar? I've searched, but no luck in finding how. Maybe you have to be a full member? (Will be once paypal gets my banks money!)

I just can't find out how... anyone with help?

(Posted here cause there aren't many how to put an avatar up forums...)

Traclo... Basic Members can use avatars.. check here.

You may need to change your setting to "Standard" by clicking on "Options" above right.

we might want to loose the directory tree option, at least for the time being. Some people seem to be getting trapped in it

Yes, ok guys, I was trapped in an invisible box of ignorance. Haw haw...

But you put me there!
Edited by liplex, 12 December 2007 - 06:21 AM.