Smileys and avatars

I think I'm not the only one who noticed there is some considerable time wasted explaining the sarcasms, puns and jokes because this forum doesn't have a normal set of smileys.

What's up with 8 smileys? It isn't enough.
There's a huge difference between forums with tons of stupid, obtrusive shit from "smiley central" described in this awesome rant post at Blogspot, and forums with a nice set of convenient ones like and others.

Please don't make me explain why this is neccessary.
It's 2011, for god sake. I agree allowing IMG code in the signatures would be horrible (that's why I hate gamer forums), but seriously, eight smileys? WTF?


The same goes for avatars. Avatars can be a neat little 50x50 px pictures with up to let's say 10 kb per piece. They create user's visual identity and don't slow down the browser. If someone is annoyed by that, he deserves a facepalm.

Going through the SM threads is like flipping electrical bills in 1955 Great Britain ugly concrete flat, while watching one national BBC channel on a black and white small tube TV, wearing an ugly gray suit.
It's too slow because our brains prefer images over words. We associate actions with identities. You can't do that with just words. Even then, written words that are visually appealing will tend to be remembered and associated at a higher rate.
It's easier to remember stuff when there's something visual backing it up. That's what demonstration experiments are for, remember?

Avatars become a distraction only if they're huge both by size and volume. Smileys are annoying if they're disgusting and/or can be posted without any limits (10 per page is the standard limit).
So don't say that "avatars and smileys" distract, because they don't. They're essential for modern forums, especially when you've got people from all over the world that can get "lost in translation" and English phrases.

I'm all for the politics where the contents should be more important than the looks, but there aren't any looks here to begin with.

Nice set of smileys and unlocked decent avatars would be what Beatles or Monthy Python were for GB. A breeze of fresh air.

[Edited on 13-10-2011 by Endimion17]

It's like you guys didn't even bother to read the first post.

Quote: Originally posted by Endimion17

It's like you guys didn't even bother to read the first post.

Quote: Originally posted by Endimion17

It's like you guys didn't even bother to read the first post.

What we want around here is some more 'scowlies'

F*%k the smilies (excuse my frence, as they say)
There is plenty with the 8 IMO.
English is best (American we will put up with )

@Endimion17 Why is there any need for any more smilies?


I think I speak for the vast majority of people on this board when I state:
If THAT 'smiley' (which is shown as the second 'smiley' in the first post, it's green and has two things in it that rotate for approx. 180 degrees) ever makes it to this board then 99.9% of the regular posters WILL leave and never come back.

IN FACT, I HAVE ONLY ONE THING TO SAY REGARDING THE WHOLE IDEA OF INTRODUCING MORE SMILEYS AND MY STATEMENT REGARDING THIS MATTER IS ATTACHED FOR THE KIND ATTENTION OF ALL AND SUNDRY.



GOOD NIGHT.

Dann2

Quote: Originally posted by gutter_ca

Quote: Originally posted by Endimion17   It's like you guys didn't even bother to read the first post. Or maybe we just totally disagree? I don't want any forum I visit to look like myspace.

Have you actually ever participated on a message board other than SM, excluding the kitschy gamer forums and other special purpose forums that allow 200x200 avatars and limitless smileys?

You are making a fallacy. It's both a straw man and slippery slope.
It's a straw man because I've never said anything in favor of ridiculously ugly forums. In fact I've said the opposite.

And it's a slippery slope fallacy because few smileys and simple, small avatars won't turn this into a Hello Kitty fan pit. You're blowing it way out of proportion.

Here's an example of a decent usage of avatars and forums.
link

How can anyone say this is revolting?


You're completely ignoring the fact that language is a very complex system that simply can not reduced to written words only. For god sake, emoticons exist for the sole purpose of reducing that negative effect. Do you hate emoticons, too?

I don't know why are you expecting anyone to use advanced English. Yes, English is the official language of science, but that doesn't include wits, puns and jokes that loose so much when written down.

What are you, a robot? I don't get it. Why are you so revolted by the notion of SM becoming a place that doesn't look like something a dot-matrix printer in a nuclear power plant operator room would expell out in a case of an emergency procedure?

There's a huge gap between the example in the link and revolting, heavy-load kitch that distracts people.
If you hate anything except letters, why don't you use MS-DOS?

Personally, I find 8 visual themes to be unnecessary. This is the highest number of visual themes I've seen on a message board.
But OK, who cares.

Gosh, it's like I'm talking to people trapped in 1975.



@fledarmus: The Chemistry LaTeX set would be a nice touch.

[Edited on 14-10-2011 by Endimion17]

Quote: Originally posted by Endimion17

Gosh, it's like I'm talking to people trapped in 1975.

Quote: Originally posted by hkparker

I come to SM is for scientific discussion. Pretty strait forward, no need to really emote.

Quote: Originally posted by Endimion17

Have you actually ever participated on a message board other than SM, excluding the kitschy gamer forums and other special purpose forums that allow 200x200 avatars and limitless smileys?

Quote: Originally posted by Endimion17

Quote: Originally posted by gutter_ca   Quote: Originally posted by Endimion17   It's like you guys didn't even bother to read the first post. Or maybe we just totally disagree? I don't want any forum I visit to look like myspace. Have you actually ever participated on a message board other than SM, excluding the kitschy gamer forums and other special purpose forums that allow 200x200 avatars and limitless smileys? You are making a fallacy. It's both a straw man and slippery slope. It's a straw man because I've never said anything in favor of ridiculously ugly forums. In fact I've said the opposite. And it's a slippery slope fallacy because few smileys and simple, small avatars won't turn this into a Hello Kitty fan pit. You're blowing it way out of proportion. Here's an example of a decent usage of avatars and forums. link How can anyone say this is revolting? You're completely ignoring the fact that language is a very complex system that simply can not reduced to written words only. For god sake, emoticons exist for the sole purpose of reducing that negative effect. Do you hate emoticons, too? I don't know why are you expecting anyone to use advanced English. Yes, English is the official language of science, but that doesn't include wits, puns and jokes that loose so much when written down. What are you, a robot? I don't get it. Why are you so revolted by the notion of SM becoming a place that doesn't look like something a dot-matrix printer in a nuclear power plant operator room would expell out in a case of an emergency procedure? There's a huge gap between the example in the link and revolting, heavy-load kitch that distracts people. If you hate anything except letters, why don't you use MS-DOS? Personally, I find 8 visual themes to be unnecessary. This is the highest number of visual themes I've seen on a message board. But OK, who cares. Gosh, it's like I'm talking to people trapped in 1975. @fledarmus: The Chemistry LaTeX set would be a nice touch. [Edited on 14-10-2011 by Endimion17]

First, let me say that I agree completely about the Chemistry LaTeX set! I find that very helpful! As for the rest of your post though...

Wow, thanks, I always love participating in a calm discussion where the other participant takes such a condescending attitude about my opinions. Gee, where were you in 1975 when I didn't even have access to facebook? /sarcasm

See, no smiley necessary.

Yes, I've participated and do participate in many active message boards, some of which have amazing numbers of smileys, embedded images, and full avatars, and some of which are text only. And yes, some of them are even kitschy gamer sites. There is a place for everything and the internet is a very big place.

No, I'm not impressed with the link you posted. First, it gives no flavor at all of the board itself, and second, I happen to find it ugly and trivial. No offense intended. Revolting may be too strong a word, but reading back through this thread, I don't see that word or anything having the same connotations used by any writer except yourself.

No, I'm not ignoring the fact that "communication" (not language) is a very complex system that does not rely solely on words. However, "language" is a single method of communication, and there are in fact languages that rely only on words. Scientists have been developing a language relying only on words and figures for hundreds of years, and the language has developed the precision and nuances required for exact communication of scientific knowledge. Learning to use the language of science is (some might say unfortunately...) one of the barriers to joining the living tradition of the scientific community.

"What are you, a robot?" Ah, I see, that must be one of those condescending insults that you so desperately require a few dozen extra smiley faces to tone down so that in my inability to understand your written language I won't take offense. But see, if you weren't calling me names, you wouldn't need the smileys to guide my poor understanding of your written English.

Oh wait, let me fix that last paragraph...

I do appreciate the points that you are trying to make. You would like to see the board more colorful, less formal, and more social. Tastes differ, and yours is certainly a popular taste. I find the way you've presented your opinion highly offensive, however, and the barely concealed contempt that you've shown for any opinion except your own... (I'm sorry, what was that? Oh, it wasn't concealed at all, much less "barely" concealed? Sorry, I stand corrected) is extremely annoying. Surely you could have made your points without being deliberately insulting, even without a multitude of smiley faces and emoticons?

Once again, let me put this disclaimer in place - I have nothing to do with the operation, maintenance, or design of the boards, and certainly wouldn't expect the operators, maintainers, or designers of this board to care at all about my opinion. I do get very personally offended, however, with people who assert that anybody who does not agree with their opinion must be seriously defective, regardless of what their opinion is and whether I happen to agree with it. That has no place at all in civil discourse, much less in scientific discourse. And there is no sarcasm emoticon required in that statement.

Quote: Originally posted by watson.fawkes

Have you participated in online discussions before the existence of the web? I have. For years. They were just text. Principally email lists and Usenet. Worked fined. Emoticons that are visual arose from text-punctuation version. If you feel you can't emote well enough, use those. They still work.

Before the Web? No. But I've used Usenet. I'm not a "youtube child" if that's what you're implying.
Yeah, it worked fine, because it works fine in its domain, which was few people and random, rare posting in the nineties.
You can't compare Usenet to modern forums.

Have you used a typing machine? I have. But nowdays I use printers because it sucks to be dependant on correction fluid and indigo-papers.
Have you used telex system? Why don't we all use telex system anymore? Old baud modems?
Why are we using graphical interface operating systems?
Your arguments are flawed because you defend something you like, and I'm defending something that's generally helpful.

Why do we have personal message system AKA U2U? We all have e-mail adresses. There's no immediate need for personal messaging, yet it's a nice touch.
I'm always for a sense of measure, though.

Somehow I think most of you freaked out while concentrating on the smileys. Standard sets (8 pieces is not standard) are normal parts of every modern forum, that's a fact, but ok, they're not extremely important.

Maybe it wasn't so obvious from my first post, but I think avatars are of greater importance. There are no visual identities here. OK, not everyone is a visual person. I am, and "text only" is very difficult for me to follow as I have difficulties catching up and creating links in my brain.
I'm actually one of those morons that uses the search form before posting and reads huge old threads, and I can tell you that it's a freaking pain in the ass when I have to browse through piles of text without hardly any visual reference.

If you're a not a visual person and don't mind living in a gray world of one font texts with hardly any formatting, that's fine, but why bashing a proposition that's simple in its nature, and would be used optionally? Forums usually have an option to display or hide avatars, so it there's someone who gets a seisure when he/she sees a 50x50 photo, everything is cool.
I'm always for options.

Holy shit, like I've came here with a proposition to turn SM into a Barbie land with unicorns and screaming, pink Comic Sans fonts...
I just want simple avatars to browse the threads more easily.

Quote: Originally posted by fledarmus

First, let me say that I agree completely about the Chemistry LaTeX set! I find that very helpful! As for the rest of your post though... Wow, thanks, I always love participating in a calm discussion where the other participant takes such a condescending attitude about my opinions. Gee, where were you in 1975 when I didn't even have access to facebook? /sarcasm See, no smiley necessary.

FYI, I hate FB and do not own an account there. I'm completely out of the whole "FB experience". Surprise, surprise... (do you feel the juices in your prefrontal cortex circulating harder, and your n.opticus bulging? I hope so.)

/sarcasm is a nice touch. But hardly anyone uses that at SM, so that's not an argument.

And any SM screenshot gives a flavor? Toilet paper has more flavor than SM!
That screenshot is actually part of one successful thread on science documentaries where people post links to the descriptions of series they've enjoyed watching, recommending them and discussing the pros and cons of each.

Quote:

"What are you, a robot?" Ah, I see, that must be one of those condescending insults that you so desperately require a few dozen extra smiley faces to tone down so that in my inability to understand your written language I won't take offense. But see, if you weren't calling me names, you wouldn't need the smileys to guide my poor understanding of your written English. Oh wait, let me fix that last paragraph...

Sm has lots of flavour; it tastes like learning, and vulture killing K3wls, but mainly like learning.


Smiley faces are god awful annoying crap for people who think a threasaourus is a dinosaur.

Even worse, they attract people who rite l1k3 th15 and then b4 u kn0w 1t..... you have to wade through shit to find a kernel of useful datum.

Quote: Originally posted by Neil

Sm has lots of flavour; it tastes like learning, and vulture killing K3wls, but mainly like learning. Smiley faces are god awful annoying crap for people who think a [bold]threasaourus[/bold] is a dinosaur. Even worse, they attract people who rite l1k3 th15 and then b4 u kn0w 1t..... you have to wade through shit to find a kernel of useful datum.