|
November 29, 2008, 12:39 AM
|
#1 |
|
Member
Join Date: November 28, 2008
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 23
|
Avatars
I am assuming the adminstrator as banned the use of avatars on this site cause i have been trying to put a pic up for a while now
|
|
|
November 29, 2008, 12:57 AM
|
#2 |
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,659
|
That would be a correct assumption.
Now you may ask, why don't we allow them? I would answer, how does an avatar further the goals of the board - to promote responsible firearms ownership? |
|
|
|
November 29, 2008, 03:38 PM
|
#3 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,380
|
Doesn't make me any difference one way or the other. Does seem funny they're not allowed tho.
|
|
|
|
November 29, 2008, 10:00 PM
|
#4 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: March 29, 2007
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,391
|
It would be a myriad of problems: Hosting, content, file types, size, et c.. It would allow for more of a personality to show through, but could also be a hassle. It would add to the cost of running the site; in more bandwidth used for trivial pictures.
|
|
|
|
November 29, 2008, 10:07 PM
|
#5 | |
|
Junior member
Join Date: August 16, 2008
Posts: 919
|
Quote:
nifty it furthers the goals in the same way smilies do  a better question is, how would it detract from the goals of the board? now that you bring it up, having individual names doesnt further the goals of the board either we should all just go by our member numbers and it should be completely grey-scale TFL seems to take pride in restricting and silencing their membership under the guise of furthering its ultimate goal... kind of like another organization that i wont name. this is a forum if all you want to do is promote something, start a news letter Last edited by MrNiceGuy; November 29, 2008 at 10:38 PM. |
|
|
|
|
November 29, 2008, 10:48 PM
|
#6 | |
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 15, 1999
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,558
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
November 29, 2008, 10:49 PM
|
#7 |
|
Junior member
Join Date: August 16, 2008
Posts: 919
|
they're empty
Private Messages: Unread 0, Total 7. |
|
|
|
November 29, 2008, 10:57 PM
|
#8 |
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 15, 1999
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,558
|
Try again.
|
|
|
|
November 29, 2008, 11:14 PM
|
#9 |
|
Junior member
Join Date: August 16, 2008
Posts: 919
|
|
|
|
|
November 30, 2008, 09:40 AM
|
#10 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: October 12, 2008
Location: INDIANA
Posts: 191
|
If by Avatars we mean posting a picture of the member under his name I would be for it, but if by avatars we mean those silly cartoon pictures of a fat women dancing, or a rabbit singing etc I agree with the staff and say no way, they are too distracting and very immature. Maybe we could (or already have) a new area made where members could post a personal picture. I'd not be against being able to see who we all are in real life. But again it would have to be strickly monitored. Just a silly idea.
|
|
|
|
November 30, 2008, 12:46 PM
|
#11 |
|
Junior member
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,171
|
Blame me:
From a PM I received: "Ken. Thanks for submitting your proposed avatar to the Peoples Commissariat of Avatar Control. The comrades were horrified by the sight of your glistening pink flesh jiggling whilst you were dancing naked in a pink thong with an Amy Winehouse beehive wig. One unnamed comrade even vomited. In light of the assault on normal sensibilities that your avatar represents, and with the thought that some sick human being could try to duplicate your puerile efforts, we have no choice but to ban avatars." Socialism, guns, free speech and avatar control  WildilovethisplaceespeciallyonsnowysundaymorningsAlaska TM |
|
|
 |
|
|
