Why should the decision be left up to two people who barely visit and post on the forums at all?

Stefan, Unixmad: I have to admit, I'm impressed. I've never been so annoyed by people I don't even interact with. Please stop making everything so difficult for Graalians, and maybe Graalians will stop detesting you from the depths of their souls.

You know, I have even said in another thread that it didnt matter one way or another to me whether animated avs were allowed or not. My opinion is still just that (although the way some members act make me wish they would just not allow them). My opinion is also that, there are more important things for the admins to concentrate on then animated avs on a forum, which I stated.
This is my opinion, and seriously, if unix wants to add it, he will. Doesn't matter what my opinion is in the end if he doesn't want it enabled.

I DO know that retaliating with flashy sigs will not help, but make things worse.
You can only keep asking, and hope one day unix will do it, and not worry so much about my opinion because it is just the same as anyone else....an opinion.

Because it is their forum, and speaking to them in the way you do will NOT get them to listen.

What's there to concentrate on? It's like pushing a button. Nothing else has to be done.

Then maybe they just dont want to do it....

Your opinion does matter though. You've proven this over and over. We asked for the forums to be classic enabled for so long and it never happened until you apparently bugged Unix about it. We can't do anything done here, and when mods disagree with our suggestions it pretty much means we aren't going to get anything because we get absolutely no help on our end.

We've been asking for this for the longest time. And like Crono said, you know there aren't going to be annoying animated avatars. It's already allowed in sigs and do you see sigs being abused left and right? No. If you see the potential it's so easy to just put in a reasonable filesize cap to stop the huge animated avatars that I don't even like. As for the flashy ones, no one likes them either! These are things that can be moderated so easily.

...only if it is something they dont mind doing, otherwise I have to bug just as much as the members do.

Yet it matters so much more than when we do it. As a mod you should approach these sort of things as unbiased as possible. A healthy percentage of the forum base has been asking for these suggestions for a long time, and having mods like you saying that you hate them and they're annoying, and only as a personal opinion, does not help our case. In their eyes it's just one more reason for them not to bother.

If they enable it, I have no problem with it, and if they dont, I have no problem with it either. I am more worried about the forums being upgraded, and errors fixed at the moment.

And yet that's all done! As for you not caring, that's the problem! You're a mod, and apparently the only medium between the playerbase and the admins, and when you don't care, we get **** on because your apathy towards change and helping the forum members mean we don't matter at all.

I always thought super mods and whatnot were supposed to act in the best interests of the forum and it's community. That is, afterall, the purpose behind the rules you uphold right? If so then I can only assume you guys would try to get our requests listened to...I mean it's just a thought, seeing as how popular the demand is and all.

wat

maybe i should have said "seriously abused" because these clowns are only doing it cuz of the nature of this topic

Allow me to paraphase you

1) yo guys stop having ****ty animated signatures

2) aw no worries no one ever has ****ty animated signatures, so

u can follow my animated avatars on twitter. : - )

Wait, twitter does not allow animated user icons either. It rewrites them a billion times anyway to crop and scale and whatnot.

i kno, just sayin it's a one time thing and atleast the 7 years bit holds true :(.

I like the sigs! If Unixmad or Stefan were to log on right now and skim through the thread, they'd miss the posts but they'd see the sigs! ^^

Is this really a big deal?
You can never please the Graal people, they will always find something else to nag about. -___-

Because we have so much to be pleased with. Maybe it's the strict moderation, maybe it's that serious bugs in the forums that were finally fixed(though many, including me, have expressed our gratitude with this), or maybe it's the projects section no one uses... or maybe, well I dunno much more!

This is something that has been casually suggested so many times, way before this upgrade has ever come. It's not like we're suddenly ungrateful and WANT EVERYTHING NOW NOW NOW.

To be honest, I wouldn't mind having everything. Now.

I'd settle for half of everything.

In all fairness, we have been waiting since 2001. :blush:

I dunno. I have a really hard time believing that people aren't screaming for animated avatars just because they know they can't have them. I mean, I couldn't tell you the last time I frequently saw people use them, anywhere on the internet. The general consensus on animated images is that they're annoying. You can't even use them on twitter, like Loriel pointed out.

Even beyond the animation, the 70x70 limit and 20kb limit is extremely small. Even as a pixel artist, where I work efficiently with my art, I find that 1) 70x70 is really small, even for the most basic avatars(I had to cut a few pixels off from Door's avatar, even though it was 3 pixels is messed up the composition) and 2) the 20kb is insane. I know I've had a few times I wanted to make a small animation for an avatar only to be disappointed that Graal forums didn't support it anyways. Also, I'd like to see where you get this general consensus from, given that every forum I've browsed supports animated avatars.

Seriously? I mean, okay, I guess the dimensions require you to think your composition through in advance, but I cannot really come up with a plausible way to make 70x70 pixels take up more than 20KB.

The internet.

Most forums I browse don't allow animated avatars. Most forums I browse are dedicated to textual content, because I'm just that much of an intellectual ^^. Animations tend to distract the eyes.

I get that you don't plan on having an obnoxiously animated avatar, but not everybody is as collected and mature as you are, Dusty. For the most part, animated images in generally are annoying and unnecessary. Subtle animations are fine. Dancing superheroes are not. Adding one more thing for mods to patrol for isn't really worth it, imo.

This is where the pro-avatar side loses my last shred of sympathy :\

I don't think Avatar would of been that good if it wasn't animated, this is very relevant.

First of all, thank you for complementing yourself beforehand, way to keep the snobby sterotype of a typical Valikorian down. Just as well, you've already stated you're opinion. You don't have to tell us twice how looking at a small moving picture annoys you.


Also, about the annoying signiture I made, I didn't mean it to be actually used, as it is quite really annoying, and would only make more problems. It was only meant to show that we don't use avatars like that because, believe it or not, we're actually a mature community (a few exceptions). I can't believe though that you people are arguing over not having small moving avatars. o_O... It isn't surprising to see Darlene whine over it though, she can't seem to stand most things normal people tolerate or do.

I want my River City Ransom dude to run, dammit!

Heh. What can I say? Just want to make sure I get my superiority across. :cool:

That's not very fair. :( You guys get to state your opinions more than once.


Well, you see, I do not like animated anythings in my field of view, while I am trying to read. Yeah, I could disabled avatars (which I do anyways), but why should I have to be unable to look at the pretty static avatars, just because a few of you are hell-bent on expressing your creativity frame-by-frame? Just something 2 think about.

Tig's signature is animated and has been for quite some time now. When you see a post of his, does his signature distract you from what he has actually posted? What about Stefan's animated signature?

Well, I have signatures and avatars disabled, so I wouldn't be able to say. However, there was once this signature I frequently saw, back when I had them enabled, that distracted me -- a bug crawling over the screen.

Ok.

Like it makes my points any less relevant. :cool:

How does it not? You have the option of removing any and all distractions, and you have chosen that option like any intelligent person would in your situation. Many people would not be distracted by animated avatars or signatures, but those who are can follow the example you have set. For those who feel as though the problem is limited to a few users, they can disable their avatars through a program like Adblock, if they so choose. You basically just said "These avatars would distract me just like signatures do. PS, I blocked signatures easily and can also do so with animated avatars. But I still don't think anyone should have the option to see them if they would like." That is just plain bitter of you. If you have an option, everyone else should too.

I used to have an animated signature and then Sam or Darlene or someone made me take it off :(

I have an animated signature and it still stays :D

heh
 

I guess I have no beef, since Sam/Darlene allowed my Sig years ago :P.
Congrats on the forums upgrade, Runs great.

Neither do I. I just think its slightly odd. didn't even know u had to have permission lolz.

I think it becomes a problem when Animated images start taking up to much unnecessary resources, especially those Big non-sense animated ones that are non-graal related. But that's just my opinion :o

What are you accusing me of here