A lot of sites use 100x100, like BHB forum sites, but I could live with 80x80.
I'm suspecting that anything larger than 50x50 would cause you to have to upload your images to photobucket or someplace and provide a link to it, instead of uploading your images here. Would you all be as eager to have bigger avatars if that was the case?
I guess bandwidth is another consideration, even though most avatars are pretty small, an animated gif could be a good size, and there are lots of users here. I'm sure Russ would prefer things here stay lean and mean. 🙂
Originally posted by SuzianneAbsolutely.
I'm suspecting that anything larger than 50x50 would cause you to have to upload your images to photobucket or someplace and provide a link to it, instead of uploading your images here. Would you all be as eager to have bigger avatars if that was the case?
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19036
Originally posted by Crowleygranted and a good point but 80/80 isn't really a lot to ask for. at the moment you can't even see what a lot of the avatars are never mind have any 'competition' with them.
Larger avatars irritates and detracts from the forum.
Many forums that allow larger avatars later become a competition to see who has the 'coolest' avatar, instead of concentrating on the material posted.
i really don't want anything bigger than 80/80 and i definitely don't want to be able to post an image in the forum text, we've both seen how retarded that can be in the conquer club forum and others i'm sure.
80/80 really wouldn't clutter up the forum either which is what i really wouldn't want it just allows everyone the chance to display their avatar of choice. we may as well not have one at the size they are now.
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19036
Originally posted by Suziannehow so? isn't the pic in our profiles 50/100 or something? in any case that is the way if used to be, i don't think anyone cares where the pic is coming from or how it gets on this site as long as they can see it.
I'm suspecting that anything larger than 50x50 would cause you to have to upload your images to photobucket or someplace and provide a link to it, instead of uploading your images here. Would you all be as eager to have bigger avatars if that was the case?
It's a well known fact that nobody really read the contents of the posts.
We're all here for the avatars. Hence, logic suggest we should have avatars
in the size range of 800x800, to push the post content into the far right of
the browser canvas so that we can sit back and enjoy each others avatars.
I've spoken. Make it so.
Originally posted by CrowleyAlthough I agree that we would not want to deteriorate the class A quality posts one often sees on RHP, I doubt slightly larger avatars would do so. Most forums have a 100x100 limit and I have yet to see it be more of a distraction from the material posted than a 50x50 avatar.
Larger avatars irritates and detracts from the forum.
Many forums that allow larger avatars later become a competition to see who has the 'coolest' avatar, instead of concentrating on the material posted.
Originally posted by CrowleySounds sound to me.
Larger avatars irritates and detracts from the forum.
Many forums that allow larger avatars later become a competition to see who has the 'coolest' avatar, instead of concentrating on the material posted.
Let's keep the 50x50 avatars, it's enough in size..
Originally posted by CrowleyI don't see that as a bad thing, when looking over most of the material posted. 😉
Larger avatars irritates and detracts from the forum.
Many forums that allow larger avatars later become a competition to see who has the 'coolest' avatar, instead of concentrating on the material posted.
I would even change mine!