Avatars gargle pucker star drippings.

Dear Choad,

I think polls suck. They rarely explain anything, and are extremely poor ways to encourage interaction. They should be secondary to actually speaking one's mind, rather than to trivially comply with a handful of preselected responses. They would ultimately provide very little additional insight on the issues, links, or members participating.

Love,
Pale

Dear Sofie,

I suck poles, I think...so I do not believe avatars are quite as ghey as they're made out to be. They marginally explain their users' identities, but are better than relying on words alone to imagine the personalities among us. They are usually trivial, harmless ways of differentiating the posts. I figure, if they're kept small and static, then they won't be too much of a distraction.

Love,
Pale

fnord wrote:

Avatars are for junior high school.

Nope, avatars are for sofaking.

sofaking wrote:

I want to know what you think of avatars.

Can I get one with a big penis on it?  I've always wanted a big penis (of my own, Taint, of my own).

I voted no for both.  Polls are usually square-peg round-hole questionnaires that validate the opinions of the pollster, mildly network TV irritating at best, get you into pointless foreign wars at worst.  Avatars however are emetics to be shunned, abominations against the god of your choice. 

pALEPHx wrote:

I suck poles, I think...so I do not believe avatars are quite as ghey as they're made out to be.[/i]

Edit: This logic confuses me Phoenix.

Who needs your approval for an avatar?
---------------------------------------------------------
-- We don' need no steeking avatars!

How come I can't select both?  I want to select "Fucking Awesome!  Don't make me cut you."

sofaking wrote:

Choad wants to know what you think of polls.

Well, not much since the results of the last poll were ignored...

Zookeeper wrote:

If there are going to be avatars I think rather than letting us pick our own they should be awarded to users by the admins here.  What could be crueller?  If I were an admin I'm sure I could come up with a great avatar for fnord.  And yes, I know I'm setting myself up big time with this suggestion.

Yessssssss.

Choad, I reinstate my humble request. I have an excellent collection of pics.

Zookeeper wrote:

What could be crueller?

The SA.com forums, apparently.

If you want to go that route, then why not just admit to swiping the whole revenue stream? Pay for avatars, let others pay to change them, and your user titles, so you have to pay to change them back. Profit at the expense of socioeconomic bullying. What sort of usergroups do you have established anyway? I can't see who's got admin/mod powers, and on most of the skins, I can't even see the cursor in each of the fields.

I can go with the Don't Fix What Ain't Broke approach, but why not tidy up the existing issues before creating new ones?

choad wrote:

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, choosing avatars for others seems more prone to abuse than any previous notion of cruelty.

We must always push the envelope.  For our children's sake if not our own.

You could soften it by users choose from three avatars the admin(s) offer them.  Or you could let them choose their own if they won't take the one offered but watermark it or put a label below it reading "I was a pussy and opted for this avatar".

MSG Tripps wrote:

You can not find enough sites that cater to this particular fetish of yours?

You have to admit it's gotta be harder for me than it is for you Dhal.  There must be thousands of sites that cater to the hobby of destroying brain cells through home pharmacology.  The toughest part for you must be managing all those bookmarks.

MSG Tripps wrote:

What do you admit to?

Holy shit!

Dhal is a Scientologist!