 StECProudPremium
join:2003-11-27
NiagaraFalls | reply to ColdinCbus
Re: Larger Avatars Well said ColdinCbus. |
|
Host:
Team Discovery
Avatar/Graphics Help
| reply to dandelion
said by dandelion:
Maybe Premium should be 50x50 and non-Premium 40x40 as an incentive to be Premium? The scaling would then be uniform if 40x40 is so important to some people!"-is a possiblility
This sounds like a good idea to me...so when using the custom display options the 50 x 50 ones could be scaled to 40 x 40, just as they are now, but they wouldn't look distorted. (And if it wouldn't be too hard to do, add another custom option to either display as 40 x 40 or 50 x 50, so each user could decide which size they want to see.) It seems like this would be a solution that would please everybody...but then of course, we'd just find something else to bitch about. 
--
4 cams, 5 cats, 7 days a week.=^..^=
My Photo Gallery |
|
 ironwalker World RenownedPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-31
Keansburg, NJ | said by tiggerstales:
said by dandelion:
Maybe Premium should be 50x50 and non-Premium 40x40 as an incentive to be Premium? The scaling would then be uniform if 40x40 is so important to some people!"-is a possiblility
This sounds like a good idea to me...so when using the custom display options the 50 x 50 ones could be scaled to 40 x 40, just as they are now, but they wouldn't look distorted. (And if it wouldn't be too hard to do, add another custom option to either display as 40 x 40 or 50 x 50, so each user could decide which size they want to see.) It seems like this would be a solution that would please everybody...but then of course, we'd just find something else to bitch about.
Yes, that does sound like a great idea for all sides.
--
"LIVE FREE OR DIE"www.Theforumz.com ---- www.ownt.com--First rule of fiber optics: you do not talk about fiber optics |
|
 dandelionPremium,MVM
join:2003-04-29
Germantown, TN
kudos:4
 ·Comcast
| reply to usa2k
said by usa2k:
Maybe Premium should be 50x50 and non-Premium 40x40 as an incentive to be Premium? The scaling would then be uniform if 40x40 is so important to some people!
I think that was a great idea of usa2k:) |
|
 fatnesssubtleJanitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
kudos:14
Bright House Netwo..
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help
Rants, Raves, and ..
| reply to tiggerstales
said by tiggerstales:
but then of course, we'd just find something else to bitch about.
Nah, it's not called bitching. It's called "making a new features request".
If 50x50 avatars are shrunk to 40x40, my guess is that there will be as many complaints about it as there have been about the 40x50 avatars getting scrunched.
"Why do I have to give up my 50x50 avatar to use the customizations?"
"Why must I be forced to look at 50x50 avatars if I do not use customizations?"
etc.
--
that's the way it goes. |
|
|
|
 RadioDocYeah, like it matters.Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL
kudos:2
 ·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | reply to ColdinCbus
said by ColdinCbus:
A new feature should enhance, not limit other features.
You must be new here...;)
I had no problem with the status quo (up to 40W x 50H) but that's not the question at bar. said by drake:
justin  if it's not to much but can you make our limit for avatars at 50 x 50 pixels? 40 x 40 is too small....Thanks!
50x50 is too big. 50x50 animated is far too annoying for a site not aimed at 12 year olds. There is no valid reason why those of us who aren't enamored by shiny baubles and distracting toys should have to put up with it.
Currently your avatar shows up just fine for me, 50 pixels tall and unsquished. But I am using the default, non-toy view... |
|
 usa2kBlessedPremium,MVM
join:2003-01-26
Redford, MI
kudos:3
·WOW Internet and..
 ·VOIPo
| reply to fatness
said by fatness:
If 50x50 avatars are shrunk to 40x40, my guess is that there will be as many complaints about it as there have been about the 40x50 avatars getting scrunched.
"Why do I have to give up my 50x50 avatar to use the customizations?"
"Why must I be forced to look at 50x50 avatars if I do not use customizations?"
etc.
Less likely to see the volume of complaints IMHO. You don't have to display them if they are valued so low.
And if you are not Premium, then you likely did not have a strong opinion and you got what you "paid for"!
You would think if people want to post an opinion here, they would want to support the site with a mere $10 a year. Therefore they can customize. The 40/50 tag choice may solve that, but 50x50 is the sensible one-answer solution.
--
Jim -- USA2K
Voip on FWD & Vonage
SEE: »www.jn2k.net
PSTN is a Legacy Gateway to VoIP, the new "phone service"  |
|
 nilJava Geek
join:2000-11-27
kudos:1
Webmasters and Dev..
Forum Feature Requ..
| Sensible answer to everyone but the person who has to do all the work coding the 200 different ways people would like to view everything with constant piles of complaints as a return
--
Life is too short to be boring |
|
 Santa FeI use Xfce, don't you wish Everyone did?Premium,ExMod 2002-7
join:2000-08-22
Freight Yard
kudos:2 | reply to drake
Boy, I see a LOT of 30x30 avatars in the future!  |
|
 JonPremium
join:2001-01-20
Lisle, IL | reply to RadioDoc
said by RadioDoc:
There is no valid reason why those of us who aren't enamored by shiny baubles and distracting toys should have to put up with it.
You sound like my wife.
If I don't like it then it shouldn't be.
What about the people who like "shiny baubles and distracting toys" ? |
|
 SteveI know your IP addressConsultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5 | said by Jon:
What about the people who like "shiny baubles and distracting toys" ?
There are plenty of sites where you can hang around with other 15 year olds.
--
Stephen J. Friedl * Security Consultant * Tustin, California USA * my web site |
|
JonPremium
join:2001-01-20
Lisle, IL
2 edits | said by Steve:
other 15 year olds.
Well that was mature, maybe you should hang out there.
15 was actually a while ago for me but I think a lot of the people posting here are only looking at it form their perspective and not considering others, But that's to be expected.
I would like 50x50 but if that doesn't happen my life will go on. |
|
 WeirdalPremium
join:2003-06-28
Grand Island, NE
kudos:20 | said by Jon:
said by Steve:
other 15 year olds.
I would like 50x50 but if that doesn't happen my life will go on.
all of ours will
I would love 50 X 50, i would also settle for 40X50 but justin doesn't seem to like things that arn't square.
I do know that i hate the new restrictions 
--
My blog |
|
RadioDocYeah, like it matters.Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL
kudos:2 Reviews:
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to Jon
Your wife is probably right.
Let the people who like "shiny baubles and distracting toys" play with them all they want. Just don't start forcing silly changes on the rest of just to enable it.
To clarify: I don't care if you can enable 1024x768 avatars on your own view of the site but don't force me to look at it. Leave the current restriction alone and figure out some way to give the fiddlers something to play with without screwing up my view of the site. Get it? Enlarging avatars to 50x50 across the board does exactly that for no good reason. |
|
JonPremium
join:2001-01-20
Lisle, IL | said by RadioDoc:
Your wife is probably right.
don't force me to look at it
She always is
But isn't that what "I see people" is for?
If you don't want to look at it that way, you don't have to. |
|
fatnesssubtleJanitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
kudos:14 Host:
Bright House Netwo..
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help
Rants, Raves, and ..
| As I understand the original suggestion, it is for 50x50 avatars to allowed, and thereby they would become visible in the default view.
--
that's the way it goes. |
|
RadioDocYeah, like it matters.Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL
kudos:2 Reviews:
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to Jon
said by Jon:
But isn't that what "I see people" is for?
If you don't want to look at it that way, you don't have to.
Exactly. So don't make me have to look at some unwanted change related to it. |
|
JonPremium
join:2001-01-20
Lisle, IL | reply to fatness
said by fatness:
As I understand the original suggestion, it is for 50x50 avatars to allowed, and thereby they would become visible in the default view.
Ok,
So make the default 40x40 and squish them, force people to use custom views to see 50x50.
That way the people who don't want to use the I see people feature won't complain about having to look at the huge avatars in the default view.
And I'm sure most who want 50x50 wouldn't mind using a custom view to see them that way.
It just seems there are a lot of people saying "I object because I don't want to have to look at it".
Just like with anything else, If you don't want to see it, Turn it off. |
|
usa2kBlessedPremium,MVM
join:2003-01-26
Redford, MI
kudos:3 Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
·VOIPo
| said by Jon:
... Ok,
So make the default 40x40 and squish them, force people to use custom views to see 50x50.
Okay if the upload spec is 50x50.
--
Jim -- USA2K ... Voip on FWD & Vonage ... SEE: »www.jn2k.net
PSTN is a Legacy Gateway to VoIP, the new "phone service" |
|
 sashwaPixie Cat Crunchin' n Foldin'Premium,Mod
join:2001-01-29
Alcatraz
kudos:15
·Comcast
Host:
DSL Extreme
Windstream
Westell
Belkin
Extended Pacific N..
| reply to drake
I would like to add my 2 cents.
1 cent = I'm using using our new toy and I have not noticed any icons looking strange to me. They look about the same to me.
2 cents = I like the fact that our avatars are the size they are. They aren't distracting as the large ones are that I see elsewhere.
So I think I *object*
sash
--
Visit the San Francisco Bay Area Forum |
|
