The removal of Animated Avatars

[U2 Fan]

I believe the reason animated avatars were removed was because someone on the preview forum pointed out the same example I just did.

I'm happy to put my hand up and say that that was probably me (posting under the username of numbnuts).

I suggested that animated avatars on the main forum index page/s should be "frozen" on the first frame of the animation (if it was technically possible to do so) because the last thing I wanted to see all over the forum index was a pile of little flashing gifs!

I'm pleased that this has now been implemented.

[Sammy Nicole]

Good, animated photos will be fixed. Now if only we get to externally host our avatar photo...

[Rhett]

So would there be an interest in a hook that restores the animation to these while in the topic view? I just whipped one up if people feel they need this.

EDIT: Probably not necessary, I guess, should be fixed for the final release of 3.2:

http://community.inv...post__p__119450

What would be sweet is if IPS put in an option.... one for leaving it like it is... and one for having them work in topic view.

This could be done with your hook as well in reverse... so yes I would be interested... and that would solve these issues and make everyone happy about the avatars.

[Rhett]

Good, animated photos will be fixed. Now if only we get to externally host our [s]avatar[/s] photo...

I would call it a day and be happy they will be working on the post's, direct your users to gravatar for remote hosting... after all that's what they do! and do it well! Gravatar is so nice for the sites that support it... one stop shop for all sites, it makes it painless. :)

[Rheddy]

I have to agree with everyone here. IPS really screwed up by removing the option for Avatars, animated or not. The two biggest complaints I have is that Avatars are no longer part of the forums and that the ability to set the dimensions of avatars through the ACP has also been removed. This should be an option where the Admin should be able to toggle Avatars on or off. I honestly thought that the idea of photos and gravatars was a dumb idea to start off with. Avatars have always been a staple of the forum experience ... and it seems like IPS is starting to become too corporate-oriented where the features process is involved.

Instead, who came up with the idea of Photos instead of Avatars?

I'm not trying to be negative about it but "I WANT MY AVATARS" and I'm sure I'm going to hear a lot of complaints from my members over this particular issue.

[Miss Moiraine]

Feld0...animated avatars are never cool. They open the door to distractions. Do you see animated avatars on Facebook? Twitter? or the other social networks? No...because usability tells you that things need a purpose. An avatar is a image representation of the person making a comment. The comment is the important part in discussions, not the avatar.

I understand where you are coming from, but I have seen animated avatars on Twitter. :tongue:

People have to do what is best for their communities. For more professional, serious boards, sure animated gifs are stupid. But for forums about anime? Xbox or PS3? For some users showing off their avatars is half the fun, and there is nothing wrong with that if that forum's admins are happy to let them have their fun.

[Darksbane0]

I would call it a day and be happy they will be working on the post's, direct your users to gravatar for remote hosting... after all that's what they do! and do it well! Gravatar is so nice for the sites that support it... one stop shop for all sites, it makes it painless. :smile:

Except many people use different avatars on different boards, which as I understand doesn't work with Gravatar (without multiple accoutns). In addition it is one more site which I have to sign up for when I can already do the same thing by l inking to my avatar that I host.

[Haku2]

Except many people use different avatars on different boards, which as I understand doesn't work with Gravatar (without multiple accoutns). In addition it is one more site which I have to sign up for when I can already do the same thing by l inking to my avatar that I host.

Exactly. And dynamic avatars aren't possible with Gravatar, which was possible in IP.Board 3.1.4 and below using the remote avatar feature.

[Telemacus2]

I agree in giving the Owners/Admins (not IPS) the choice as to whether we wish to use animated avatars in our boards or not.
As for the board index, I agree that having animated avatars there would be a p.i.t.a

[Michael]

I have to agree with everyone here. IPS really screwed up by removing the option for Avatars, animated or not. The two biggest complaints I have is that Avatars are no longer part of the forums and that the ability to set the dimensions of avatars through the ACP has also been removed. This should be an option where the Admin should be able to toggle Avatars on or off. I honestly thought that the idea of photos and gravatars was a dumb idea to start off with. Avatars have always been a staple of the forum experience ... and it seems like IPS is starting to become too corporate-oriented where the features process is involved.

Instead, who came up with the idea of Photos instead of Avatars?

I'm not trying to be negative about it but "I WANT MY AVATARS" and I'm sure I'm going to hear a lot of complaints from my members over this particular issue.

So why can't you just change the text to say 'avatar' on your board, and go with that?

[Rhett]

Except many people use different avatars on different boards, which as I understand doesn't work with Gravatar (without multiple accoutns). In addition it is one more site which I have to sign up for when I can already do the same thing by l inking to my avatar that I host.

Yes you can have multiple avatars, one for each email.... you can add as many emails as you would like to one gravatar account. I have mine setup with three emails I use on sites.... depending on which one I use it pulls it just fine. You can also go in with one click and change or reassign avatars to each address.

[Haku2]

Yes you can have multiple avatars, one for each email.... you can add as many emails as you would like to one gravatar account. I have mine setup with three emails I use on sites.... depending on which one I use it pulls it just fine. You can also go in with one click and change or reassign avatars to each address.

I like to use the same email for all the boards I go on and it would be very counterproductive of me to make 100s of email accounts just so I can have a different avatar on each board.

[Michael]

You can have a different avatar on each board, just upload the one you want on each board. This didn't change in 3.2.

[Darksbane0]

Yes you can have multiple avatars, one for each email.... you can add as many emails as you would like to one gravatar account. I have mine setup with three emails I use on sites.... depending on which one I use it pulls it just fine. You can also go in with one click and change or reassign avatars to each address.

Just as cumbersome, I have 1 email account and have no desire to setup multiple ones just to have a different different avatars when I can do it much easier by just directly linking to the avatar image like 3.1 has currently

You can have a different avatar on each board, just upload the one you want on each board. This didn't change in 3.2.

But as an admin I really don't want to let my users upload avatars. So now the only option is Gravatar, whereas before I had the options of hosting my own avatars for them to choose from or allowing them to link to externally hosted avatars.

[Haku2]

You can have a different avatar on each board, just upload the one you want on each board. This didn't change in 3.2.

We were talking about it in regards to remotely hosted avatars, which is only possible via Gravatar in IP.Board 3.2.

[Rhett]

I like to use the same email for all the boards I go on and it would be very counterproductive of me to make 100s of email accounts just so I can have a different avatar on each board.

Then upload each avatar.... WOW are you that lazy?

You can have a different avatar on each board, just upload the one you want on each board. This didn't change in 3.2.

Exactly

Just as cumbersome, I have 1 email account and have no desire to setup multiple ones just to have a different different avatars when I can do it much easier by just directly linking to the avatar image like 3.1 has currently

But as an admin I really don't want to let my users upload avatars. So now the only option is Gravatar, whereas before I had the options of hosting my own avatars for them to choose from or allowing them to link to externally hosted avatars.

You can still do this... put them in a folder, point your users to that folder, pretty simple.

You guys are being ridiculous.... hosting an avatar for each user is not going to do anything to your bandwidth or server..... WOW some people are just clueless on how things work I guess.

[Haku2]

Just as cumbersome, I have 1 email account and have no desire to setup multiple ones just to have a different different avatars when I can do it much easier by just directly linking to the avatar image like 3.1 has currently

But as an admin I really don't want to let my users upload avatars. So now the only option is Gravatar, whereas before I had the options of hosting my own avatars for them to choose from or allowing them to link to externally hosted avatars.

Exactly. I don't use Gravatar myself and I wouldn't expect my users to use it either. It's just more steps my users have to take just to accomplish a simple thing. And again, you can't set up multiple avatars with the same email using Gravatar. Furthermore, dynamic avatars aren't possible with Gravatar.

[Christophe]

WOW some people are just clueless on how things work I guess.

I am giving you all my LIKE points for the year in order to bump this statement to the top of EVERY thread that will be made until the 3.2 final is released.

[Rhett]

lmao thx... I think.... lol

[Haku2]

Then upload each avatar.... WOW are you that lazy?

Exactly

You can still do this... put them in a folder, point your users to that folder, pretty simple.

You guys are being ridiculous.... hosting an avatar for each user is not going to do anything to your bandwidth or server..... WOW some people are just clueless on how things work I guess.

When you have a board that has several million users, all the disk space and bandwidth from avatar uploads really add up. Therefore, hosting the avatars on other servers is beneficial. A few of the boards I've been on actually disable avatar uploads for this very reason. The point I'm trying to make here is that the admins should have all the control in respect to what avatar options they want available to their users. Why is this so hard to implement? It's been present in the past versions of IP.Board!

[Rhett]

show me a site with millions of users... if you do I will show you plenty of cash for proper hosting and admin... ie: facebook and twitter...

now get back to reality please.... I understand it should be an option, I just think some of you are blowing it up way too far.

[Christophe]

The fact that a function has been present in a previous version of a software is not a valid argument to have it stay in a future version. That line or reasoning is not valid young padawan.
Haku2 when you have a board with several million users then avatars are probably the last worry and as a reminder an avatar is only loaded once not everytime you reload a page unless individual users have set their browsers to no cache.

Avatar issue is NOT a bandwidth issue. Avatars were removed because people do NOT want to have to set two images for a single account. At least the majority of users do not want to. Some people like to have a photo and an avatar but ask large boards and you will see that many boards have people putting their photo on their profile and never noticing or knowing why it does not show when they post. One of our own board we spend a ton A TON of wasted time making changes behind the scenes and putting photos as the users avatars because we know they will never be assed to do it themsleves...lol some people are really dumb and you have to play to the lowest common denominator.

In the end less work is better for the user. Being able to set a single image is better to have to set two for the average user and that is what is the target of the board I believe.

[Haku2]

The fact that a function has been present in a previous version of a software is not a valid argument to have it stay in a future version. That line or reasoning is not valid young padawan.

Haku2 when you have a board with several million users then avatars are probably the last worry and as a reminder an avatar is only loaded once not everytime you reload a page unless individual users have set their browsers to no cache.

Avatar issue is NOT a bandwidth issue. Avatars were removed because people do NOT want to have to set two images for a single account. At least the majority of users do not want to. Some people like to have a photo and an avatar but ask large boards and you will see that many boards have people putting their photo on their profile and never noticing or knowing why it does not show when they post.

In the end less work is better for the user. Being able to set a single image is better to have to set two for the average user and that is what is the target of the board I believe.

I'm not complaining about the decision to merge avatars and profile photos. I'm complaining about the removal of avatar galleries and the removal of the remote avatar feature. The only reason I still use the term "avatar" rather than "photo" is because that's the term bulletin boards have used for years and most still are. The term "avatar" seems more appropriate because not too many people upload photos of themselves on bulletin boards.

[♥ Adam ♠]

Here is a compromise and I would assume an easy solution to everyone's needs.

Allow for all 4 options

• Option to turn on or off animated avatars
• Allow for photo uploads (with option to turn on or off)
• Allow for Gravatar (with option to turn on or off)
• Allow for off site linked photos (with option to turn on or off)
  

This I would assume allow the best of all worlds combined. Alternatively, The Webmasters / Administrators should be able to turn on or off all these features.

I would also suggest the option to completely turn off avatars completely, for those more "corporate" communities (sites).

[Nimdock]

Here is a compromise and I would assume an easy solution to everyone's needs.

Allow for all 4 options

• Option to turn on or off animated avatars
• Allow for photo uploads (with option to turn on or off)
• Allow for Gravatar (with option to turn on or off)
• Allow for off site linked photos (with option to turn on or off)
  

This I would assume allow the best of all worlds combined. Alternatively, The Webmasters / Administrators should be able to turn on or off all these features.

I would also suggest the option to completely turn off avatars completely, for those more "corporate" communities (sites).

I would be fine with that.