Why such small avatars?

Does it really use so much bandwidth to have, say, 100x100? In this day and age 50X50 is pretty piss poor imo

Because they are small enough to identify a poster but not large enough to be obnoxious. Why do you need a bigger one? There answer is, you don't.

Large avatars are for other places. I think the 50 x 50 limit is completely sensible and makes it so that the board does not make my and other members' eyes bleed to death.

Not sure it's about bandwidth (a current senior staff member could answer that way better than I could) but more the eye-bleeding factor.

Finder said:

Because they are small enough to identify a poster but not large enough to be obnoxious. Why do you need a bigger one? There answer is, you don't.

Click to expand...

lol I love your hate for all things frilly on discussion forums.

bit_pattern said:

Does it really use so much bandwidth to have, say, 100x100? In this day and age 50X50 is pretty piss poor imo

Click to expand...

let us know your address and we'll send you a refund.

people should be encouraged to post a bigger version of their avatar in the personal picture portion of their profile i think.

i like the small avatars, but if users were encouraged to post a bigger version in their user CP section it would be nice since sometimes you can't tell what the fuck a persons avatar is lol.

It makes my eyes bleed having to squint to figure out wtf is going on with most avatars.

I think on a lot of other sites, people use their own pictures as an avatar...most of us here on BL like to remain anonymous and post some other picture that does not involve our own face. I like the small avatars...I'm here for the content of the posts, not to stare at them.

Korn3x said:

i like the small avatars, but if users were encouraged to post a bigger version in their user CP section it would be nice since sometimes you can't tell what the fuck a persons avatar is lol.

Click to expand...

well now, that's a symptom of a shit avatar.

We need bigger avatars and the option of having a signature.

DENIED

and

DENIED

^Thank you, and agreed.

Want bigger avatars? Start paying for our server costs

Squint harder.

felix said:

well now, that's a symptom of a shit avatar.

Click to expand...

very true. well then i change my perspective and people should be encouraged not to put shitty avatars then lol.

Cornishman said:

We need bigger avatars and the option of having a signature.

Click to expand...

i definitely vote no for the sigs. sigs are the most annoying thing ever, and are very distracting. plus people always have some obnoxious stuff posted in them

I think I agree with the OP to an extent. There's plenty of extra white space around the avatar, location info, post count - basically that whole white box to the left of each post - currently that allowing 100x100 avatars wouldn't make much of difference. Then again, I really don't know how the avatar would be positioned if it's larger, so it's possible that it could drastically change how everything looks.

a bigger avatar would take up more space on the screen, meaning less content on the screen at once, meaning more scrolling for everyone. i am old with fucked wrists and hate having to scroll unnecessarily.

but on the other hand, if the OP would like to send us about 10000 euros every year for server costs, we'll do whatever he likes.

^ What I meant was that there is already over 100x100 pixels of white space where the avatar current is. If the avatars were bigger, theoretically, all it would do was take up that extra white space, not changing anything. Currently, we all have to scroll past that large area of space where the avatars are, so if they were a little bit bigger - and again, theoretically, because I have no idea if it would actually work out like this - it would just occupy that extra space instead of creating more.

Again, just to be clear, I have no idea if it would actually work out like this. For all I know, if it the avatars were larger, they wouldn't occupy the extra space, but create more instead.

But also, is 50 extra pixels really that much?

EDIT - Just recalled that that white space changes in size depending on the how long the post is, so I guess I can see both sides of this argument. 50 pixels in height would make each post box a little taller, but the width wouldn't change anything. The question is: is 50 extra pixels in height really that much? That's a question for people up much higher than I, so we'll leave it to them. FWIW, my opinion is that it's not.

At the end of the day, though, the size of our avatars is the least of my concerns. If they change, great. If they don't, wonderful.

You already pointed out the best solution though: send us 10000 Euros every year and we'll make the avatars as big as you want, on the one condition that part (half) of that money goes to providing a salary for OD Mods whose names start with an S.

Hey now, look which forum you're currently posting in, if anyone starts getting a salary it should be the place where the idea came about! :D

ah wait a minute... we've already had a discussion about this: http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?p=8331249#post8331249

ok ok, you make a good point.... felix, I'll give you a 10% cut of my profits