dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2892
share rss forum feed


Insight6

join:2012-08-25

DSLR Avatars; Telephone Customer Service Representatives

Two rants for the price of one post!

1. DSLR is a great site. A wonderful diverse resource of information and entertainment. However, when are they going to move into the 21st Century and allow avatars of at least 100 X100 or 120 x 120? The current 50 x 50 is ridiculous.

2. I am so sick of telephone customer service representatives. First off, restricting just those that speak English as their first language and are living and working in the US: They talk one hundred miles an hours. So fast that even when they actually say something that if you saw a transcript would make perfect sense they talk so fracking fast one's mind responds to their blather as what the hell did they just say. Whether they are asking or answering a question it comes across as incomprehensible. It is as if the concept of the period or word separation has ceased to exist.

Then there are those that speak English as their second language. They fall into two categories:

The worse their English they think that the faster they talk the better it will be as no one will notice they can barely speak English. (You can't make this stuff up.)

Then there are those from certain overseas cultures that repeat religiously, like its a religious chant actually, over, and over, "I apologize" that... Every sentence of every thing they says contains the phrase "I apologize."

Finally, the CS rep, usually but not all ways outsource, that doesn't understand or hear a word you say as they are totally absorbed in looking at their computer interface CS data in front of them. I swear half the time instead of asking them a standard question or making a standard comment you could toss in a "You mother wears army boots when she screws" and they would reply, "I apologize for the inconvenience"



Juggernaut
Irreverent or irrelevant?
Premium
join:2006-09-05
Kelowna, BC
kudos:2

1 recommendation

Please feel free to go Premium, and support the site for bandwidth costs.
--
Better to have it and not need it, then need it and not have it.



Weirdal
Premium
join:2003-06-28
Grand Island, NE
kudos:21

4 recommendations

reply to Insight6

Kids these days don't realize how long and hard we fought to increase avatar sizes from 40x40 to 50x50. Be thankful for what you have.
--
»[Info] The DSLR Orangeface extension 2.0!



Insight6

join:2012-08-25
reply to Juggernaut

You mean premium where you pay more for the same valuable features you mostly have now? Plus with premium you get the same 50 X 50 avatar size limitation. You're funny!

Besides when I joined the premium feature wasn't functioning. A temporary glitch I'm sure.

By the way what are those "premium" features. I not being sarcastic. I'm not really sure what they are. I don't want for anything with the my current membership except for the midget last century sized avatars.

Meanwhile DSLR needs to go into the 21st Century with other FREE premium sites that somehow manage to provide the much larger avatar. Some how they they seem to all be able to get by and most of them are free too!

Meanwhile telephone CS Reps still suck.



Rob
In Deo speramus.
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3

2 recommendations

reply to Insight6

Would larger avatars make your visit to this site more enjoyable?

One thing I like about this site's forum system that it's about content, not about pretty colors, images, etc.

I think the current size is just fine.

Personally, I'd love to see an iPhone app for this site so that viewing posts and posting new threads is easier.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us



vaxvms
ferroequine fan
Premium
join:2005-03-01
Wormtown
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Charter

said by Rob:

One thing I like about this site's forum system that it's about content, not about pretty colors, images, etc.

+1
--
It's not really power unless you abuse it.


Insight6

join:2012-08-25
reply to Rob

said by Rob:

Would larger avatars make your visit to this site more enjoyable?

Yes, its a question of personal creativity or expression. The current size limitation is like being asked to describe your life in 10 words or less, and cite four life experiences of interest.

Larger or the size avatar I refer to are the industry standard. Doesn't one of the largest and most prestigious sites like DSLR offer their members the same level of personal expression and creativity as the so many lesser sites?

The question you and others that share the view the current size is fine should be asking the SERIOUS question why aren't the members offered the 100x100 or 120x120 size. DSLR should provide a SERIOUS answer of substance to that question.


Rob
In Deo speramus.
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3

said by Insight6:

The question you and others that share the view the current size is fine should be asking the SERIOUS question why aren't the members offered the 100x100 or 120x120 size. DSLR should provide a SERIOUS answer of substance to that question.

This is simple. The site's long-term, frequent (and often premium) users are not demanding 100x100 or 120x120 -- they are happy with the current layout.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us


Insight6

join:2012-08-25

You aren't asking the question or any question, you are just assuming facts not in evidence, wildly speculating, and compensating for your puny avatar. (Insert good-nature sticking out tongue smilie--also not available.)



Rob
In Deo speramus.
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3

said by Insight6:

You aren't asking the question or any question, you are just assuming facts not in evidence, wildly speculating, and compensating for your puny avatar. (Insert good-nature sticking out tongue smilie--also not available.)

Having been a member for over a decade, your question about larger avatars has been brought up more times than I can count.. and the outcome is the same.. us regular members are OK with the current layout.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us

dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
kudos:8
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to Insight6

said by Insight6:

Yes, its a question of personal creativity or expression.

This is your only outlet for "creativity" ?


CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
reply to Insight6

There is a 'standard' for avatar size???? Not that I have ever heard of and when I was a mod for a website there were zero 'standards' for avatars and signatures - it all boils down to the owner of the site.

If you want outlets for creativity - then we have digital imaging forum and an avatar forum.

Sorry - but I think larger avatars won't do a thing to help your or anyone else's creativity. After all - there are a zillion other sites were creativity is the backbone of the site.

"The question you and others that share the view the current size is fine should be asking the SERIOUS question why aren't the members offered the 100x100 or 120x120 size. DSLR should provide a SERIOUS answer of substance to that question. "

I don't even think your issue to be serious - till you own the site.
--
Brian

"It drops into your stomach like a Abrams's tank.... driven by Rosanne Barr..." A. Bourdain



jjoshua
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ
kudos:3
reply to Insight6

I don't want to look at your larger avatar. They are already large enough so I can figure out who is posting without having to read the name.



Insight6

join:2012-08-25

1 edit
reply to dave

said by dave:

said by Insight6:

Yes, its a question of personal creativity or expression.

This is your only outlet for "creativity" ?

Actually no. Just the opposite. It is, however, one of my many life venues that offers such little opportunity for creativity. Thanks for caring.

I like Rob's quasi "the emperor has no clothes logic argument." It is analogous to year after year the question at a pig farm of how good is the slop here being brought up by all the pigs time after time and the pigs continue to state the slop is just fine. Best slop around.

Not calling Rob or ANY members pigs or suggesting that DSLR in anyway offers or serves slop--well except for one forum that offers slop in the form of its posts and that will remain unnamed. But that's the crazies that post there, not DSLR's fault or responsibility for the loons and their posts in said site.

Regarding the avatar, gee I didn't know some peoples identity was so dominated by their membership here. If one even constructively and civilly offers up a criticism some, not Rob and Dave, of course, respond with how dare my site and by extension my ego be attacked.

But how about an official answer from DSLR on why unlike all most all other sites 100X100 or 120X120 avatars are not offered. I mean its a simple question that should be able to be reasonably and easily offered.

Meanwhile about those CS reps. LOL! (Help, help the mother ship is being "attacked.")


Johkal
Cool Cat
Premium,MVM
join:2002-11-13
Happy Valley
kudos:10

If you want to suggest a change, then post here: »Feedback

Personally; I could give a goat's arse what size the avatar is.



Weirdal
Premium
join:2003-06-28
Grand Island, NE
kudos:21
reply to Insight6

said by Insight6:

But how about an official answer from DSLR on why unlike all most all other sites 100X100 or 120X120 avatars are not offered. I mean its a simple question that should be able to be reasonably and easily offered.

You can see pages upon pages of discussion in the correct forum, including plenty of posts from dslr staff.

»[request] Larger Avatars
»[request] Avatars - Bigger
»[request] Allow for a bit larger Avatars
--
»[Info] The DSLR Orangeface extension 2.0!


Msradell
P.E.
Premium
join:2008-12-25
Louisville, KY
reply to Rob

said by Rob:

One thing I like about this site's forum system that it's about content, not about pretty colors, images, etc.

Why waste page space and bandwidth with avatars? They don't make the information provided any better and just distracted people. On many sites you can actually turn them off, which I do if I can since they are useless!


Insight6

join:2012-08-25

1 edit

Wow it looks like all of the Linus Van Pelts of the DSLR world have had a constructive criticism or suggestion of a change regarding their blanket. Their response is not surprising.

Meanwhile how about those customer service representatives? (Both US and outsource.) LOL.

I would speculate that the reason, and it is just speculation, why DSLR doesn't offer the OPTION of larger avatars is because the forum software or setup either won't permit it or in order to make the change to allow it if possible the software is so old that it would be to big of a project, literally a project, to do so.

As for the argument about the extra bandwidth--gosh, I seriously can't tell if people are joking when they say that or are delusional, or uh, just misinformed in terms of relevancy.

Meanwhile about those CS Reps!



TheHarvester
Premium
join:2006-08-25
Dana Point, CA
kudos:3
reply to Insight6

said by Insight6:

(Insert good-nature sticking out tongue smilie--also not available.)

Is this the one you refer to?
--
mbsastronomy.com


Weirdal
Premium
join:2003-06-28
Grand Island, NE
kudos:21

1 recommendation

reply to Insight6

said by Insight6:

I would speculate that the reason, and it is just speculation, why DSLR doesn't offer the OPTION of larger avatars is because the forum software or setup either won't permit it or in order to make the change to allow it if possible the software is so old that it would be to big of a project, literally a project, to do so.

Here's a real answer for you...

Avatars here used to be between 40x30 and 40x85 (possibly larger?). The user-info box to the left of posts was standardized for everybody and having a fixed-width worked well for the layout. The avatars could be expanded downward without screwing up the layout so we were allowed a variable height. Eventually that restriction was changed to 40x30 - 40x50 for some reason.

In 2004, the "I See People" feature was implemented. (see this thread) You do not have access to this since you're not premium. This allows users to create a completely customized user info boxes by using their own html. ALL avatars were resized to 40x40 (and the restrictions for new ones were changed) so that people wouldn't have to worry about odd-sized avatars screwing up their layouts.

In 2005, after years of bitching by members, Justin implemented 50x50 avatars. Every new avatar must be 50x50, but there was still the question of what to do with the grandfathered 40x40 avatars (and also the even-older odd-sized ones). The solution was to keep resizing the tall avatars to 40x40 and display the 40x40 ones at their native res. I seem to recall a short period where everything was resized to 50x50, but that didn't last long. So now there is effectively two possible avatar sizes you can encounter on here, and you have to design your "I See People" settings to work with both sizes. Since it's only 10px, most layouts didn't have any problems with the larger avatars.

That brings us to where we are today. Adding significantly larger avatars would screw up a lot of people's I See People settings. It's difficult to design a good user box that makes effective use of space when you don't know if you'll be seeing a 40x40 or 100x100 avatar. Even if you made the larger size mandatory and just upscaled everything to be consistent, people would still have to redesign their user boxes, which they haven't had to touch for the past seven years.

So your request would be much more reasonable if it weren't for that one site feature.
--
»[Info] The DSLR Orangeface extension 2.0!


Insight6

join:2012-08-25

Thanks for the input on the CS reps!

As for the size of avatars--the standard in most modern forum sites/boards and so on is users are limited to a MAXIMUM size for their Avatar and are significantly limited to shape--the finished image usually has to be square or very close to it.

So the maximum many be the industry standard of 100 x 100 or 120 x 120 but the member can choose a 50 x 50 if they want--just as long as it conforms to the shape requirement.

Thank you sincerely for both the quality of your explanation and the time you took to write and post it.

However, it appears to me in interpreting your post that it seems by inference and some fact to indirectly substantiate what I said.

The current avatar 50 x 50, way small by industry standard, size is on the current, "clunky" outdated forum software just too complicated to offer up what I explain above in terms of choice.



vaxvms
ferroequine fan
Premium
join:2005-03-01
Wormtown
kudos:3

industry standard ???



dandelion
Premium,MVM
join:2003-04-29
Germantown, TN
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to Insight6

No one said DSLR is the "current" forum "standard". In fact I very much enjoy it's uniqueness and hope it doesn't go to the "standard" thanking my luck that Justin decided to go through all the effort to restart the forum after last summer.

As far as avatar size, I don't care.. I can see 50X50 without using my glasses or squinting and it isn't blurry like the 40X40 could be.

Maybe outdated? Not sure, I do know there are probably more members on DSLR then most other forums.
--
Spare computer cycles can help find answers
Find A Cure!



Weirdal
Premium
join:2003-06-28
Grand Island, NE
kudos:21
reply to Insight6

said by Insight6:

The current avatar 50 x 50, way small by industry standard, size is on the current, "clunky" outdated forum software just too complicated to offer up what I explain above in terms of choice.

I've read this sentence a few times now and still don't know what you're trying to say.

The forum software here is custom-built, and certainly robust enough to allow for avatars of any size. After all, avatar sizes have changed plenty of times in the past. The problem is that this forum, unlike any other forum that I know of, allows users to create a custom user-box layout that has very few limitations at all. If you can't enforce a standard user-box layout, you can't radically change avatar sizes because it will screw up layout for MANY people.

For example, here's my custom layout I designed:



Increasing avatar size would force me to change that layout completely. A lot of other users would be in the same boat.
--
»[Info] The DSLR Orangeface extension 2.0!


vaxvms
ferroequine fan
Premium
join:2005-03-01
Wormtown
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Charter

1 recommendation

reply to Insight6



rockotman
...Blown On The Steel Breeze
Emerging Research
join:2000-08-06
DSotM
kudos:2

1 recommendation

reply to Insight6

Anyone can create a big, fat 100X100 avatar.

Only a truly creative graphics guru (and you claim you want to express your creativity) can master an animated 50X50 avatar with a 8K size limit without it looking like crap.

Get creative.
--
Shine on you crazy diamond...



Insight6

join:2012-08-25

1 edit
reply to Insight6

Now proven by the repetitive standardized Pavlovian response and near boilerplate posts---the option to have different size or larger avatars is too much for DSLR the site, the software, and many of the members--mostly members from the stone age or at least the last century and in many cases, (not all, NOT ALL), indicative or the same concept why we have term limits for politicians.

I vote that we just change everyone's avatar to that of Linus with his blanket!

Also as mentioned Premium* wasn't working when I joined but I am not motivated to pay 10 bucks to get a 50 x 50 avatar. (Fact is I've never belonged to a forum where you had to pay to get an avatar.) Or did I misunderstand a previous comment that said you had to "upgrade" to premium to get an avatar?

Meanwhile how about those telephone customer service reps? Never mind. Linus doesn't care about telephone customer service reps!



Juggernaut
Irreverent or irrelevant?
Premium
join:2006-09-05
Kelowna, BC
kudos:2

No, you don't need to be premium to use an avatar. I don't recall reading that at all.
--
Better to have it and not need it, then need it and not have it.



Insight6

join:2012-08-25

1 recommendation

reply to Insight6

I am so sick of telephone customer service representatives. First off, restricting just those that speak English as their first language and are living and working in the US:

They talk one hundred miles an hours. So fast that even when they actually say something that if you saw a transcript would make perfect sense they talk so fracking fast one's mind responds to their blather as what the hell did they just say. Whether they are asking or answering a question it comes across as incomprehensible. It is as if the concept of the period or word separation has ceased to exist.

Then there are those that speak English as their second language, some in this country or worse outsourced. They fall into two categories:

The worse their English they think that the faster they talk the better it will be as no one will notice they can barely speak English. (You can't make this stuff up.)

Then there are those from certain overseas cultures that repeat religiously, like its a religious chant actually, over, and over, "I apologize" that... Every sentence of every thing they says contains the phrase "I apologize."

Finally, the CS rep, usually but not all ways outsource, that doesn't understand or hear a word you say as they are totally absorbed in looking at their computer interface CS data in front of them. I swear half the time instead of asking them a standard question or making a standard comment you could toss in a "You mother wears army boots when she screws" and they would reply, "I apologize for the inconvenience"

And the problems just get worse as the voice quality of telephone calls understandably decrease with greater dependency on cellular as the telephone source.



Weirdal
Premium
join:2003-06-28
Grand Island, NE
kudos:21

1 recommendation

reply to Insight6

said by Insight6:

Now proven by the repetitive standardized Pavlovian response and near boilerplate posts---the option to have different size or larger avatars is too much for DSLR the site, the software, and many of the members--mostly members from the stone age or at least the last century and in many cases, (not all, NOT ALL), indicative or the same concept why we have term limits for politicians.

I vote that we just change everyone's avatar to that of Linus with his blanket!

Also as mentioned Premium* was working when I joined but I am not motivated to pay 10 bucks to get a 50 x 50 avatar. (Fact is I've never belonged to a forum where you had to pay to get an avatar.) Or did I misunderstand a previous comment that said you had to "upgrade" to premium to get an avatar?

Meanwhile how about those telephone customer service reps? Never mind. Linus doesn't care about telephone customer service reps!

Resorting to insults after being given a perfectly logical explanation. You are the worst.

Have you tried taking a step back and realizing that you are not the beautiful, unique snowflake that you think you are? Not every place of discussion online has to be an outlet for you to express your inner creativity with an elaborate avatar. This is a forum for technical discussions, first and foremost, and having gigantic avatars that are "industry standard" (wtf?) size adds nothing to that experience. In fact, most members would say (and have said) that it detracts.

Allowing users to customize their user-box displays is a great feature, and it's something that comes at the cost of not allowing avatars of all shapes and sizes. DSLR is the only forum that I know of that allows such robust control of the layout. The fact that you would rather have large avatars instead of that feature is insane.
--
»[Info] The DSLR Orangeface extension 2.0!