Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

I don't believe this has been answered in the above topic:

Why can't everybody have a custom title?

There doesn't seem to be an actual reasn for not giving everyone custom titles.

Please explain. Thanks.

--------------------

You say I'm weird: you're the person who is exited when you kick a leather testicle into a net.

Quote

Kill me, or else you a murderer!

Let me turn it around. What benefit would there be in allowing this?

Back in the day, someone decided that these sorts of forums would be best off showing a member title to display someone's status. Over time, the privileged ended up with custom ones because they could fiddle with their forums. Then makers of later board software made it easier, so it was easier to give everyone a custom title. So admins did.

Fair enough.

But once you can control every aspect of your profile, what does any of it mean any more? What's the difference between a member title and a signature? Nothing more than the length and where they appear in a post.

So around here, your member title is still an indication of your post rank. It'll never be anything other than your post rank unless you're distinguished in some way by either winning a competition or having some kind of authority on the site or forums.

That's the way I see it, anyway.

Quote (Tiddles @ 18th March 2006 14:03)

Let me turn it around. What benefit would there be in allowing this?

Being able to personalize things; customizing your forum experience is always an enjoyable thing. Though personally, I'd rather see avatars being customizable than titles (I feel somewhat awkward knowing this is the only boards I frequent that don't let me use my Ethan avatar )

Frankly, I don't see a reason why this shouldn't be allowable, if people want it. It's more of a matter of prestige and being able to feel like you own your own account entirely than a matter of ranking and superiority. There IS the matter of unacceptable titles/avatars, but then again we get custom sigs so it's a moot point, really.

Either way, that's just my opinion, and nothing more than that. The bottom line is, we get to post here for free. And people like free stuff. >"<

--------------------

"Judge not a man by his thoughts and words, but by
the quality and quantity of liquor in his possession
and the likelyhood of him sharing."

Really doesn't matter to me, really. I use the same Avatar I use here on every other board I visit.

Personally, I get pissed off at all sorts of Avatars that express every color of the rainbow because people picked theirs out from wherever. That process has also led me to see some really disturbing stuff that I'd prefer not to see.

As far as custom rank goes- It seems the current system is fine. Uniform ranks gives you an idea of how new a person is to the board, etc.

--------------------

If you've been mod-o-fied,
It's an illusion, and you're in-between.
Don't you be tarot-fied,
It's just alot of nothing, so what can it mean?
~Frank Zappa

Sins exist only for people who are on the Way or approaching the Way

In my opinion, a good percentage of custom avatars end up being ugly and distorted because they weren't sized right, and sometimes just rude and offensive. Can you imagine how many 13-year-olds would try to get in avatars that are offensive? And then people would complain, etc etc.

--------------------

I had an old signature. Now I've changed it.

I'd say, ideally, people should be able to choose the avatar and title they like, but then ideally, they'd choose something non-annoying and non-offensive. One of the reasons I enjoy CoN so much is because it looks so "clean"--it's easy to read people's posts because there aren't obnoxious things like 5-million-colors signature images sitting between every pair of posts. Since that's not the case, there's gotta be some limitation as to the choices available. On one hand there's that being the case; on the other hand, I'm not an admin so I don't make the decisions.

I think that avatars and titles do say something about members' personalities, so if I were running a forum, I might allow them--say, with moderator approval. Then again, I've never run a forum before, so I have no clue how effective such an idea would be.

I do know that I often (and usually unconsciously) use people's avatars to recognize them.

A comment on custom sigs vs. custom titles: There's a difference. A title is placed right below a member's username (or really close), and is just that--a title. The reason I mention avatars and titles together is because they are visually associable--such as a person getting a Simon Belmont sprite as an avatar and using the title "Vampire Killer". There's an effect there that wouldn't be achieved even by the person getting a Simon sprite, no title, and "Vampire Killer" in their sig. It feels less so a feature of their current fancy and more so...something else I can't quite describe--It's connected to the member, instead of the avatar itself, so the joke wouldn't work.

--------------------

Check the "What games are you playing at the moment?" thread for updates on what I've been playing.

You can find me on the Fediverse! I use Mastodon, where I am @[email protected] ( https://sakurajima.moe/@glennmagusharvey )

Quote

...if I were running a forum, I might allow them--say, with moderator approval.

I think that's the best thing to do. But, on the other hand, a custom title is kind of a mark of authority, really. It would be so, so cool if we could have titles and avatars though. I love making avatars.

--------------------

'Bastards, we may be, but clever are we.'
Thorn, FFIX

Quote (Luna @ 18th March 2006 15:34)

But, on the other hand, a custom title is kind of a mark of authority, really.

"No Longer a Newbie. "



One of the great things about CoN is the fact signatures can't have images in them. Or anything that would encourage users to make huge page-long signatures.

Though, personally, I don't see how ugly avatars could be a problem. It's the user's choice, and hardly something that affects layout like a 500x800 signature would (god, the horrible memories...) Frankly, I think people who abuse shorthand, typo at a ridiculous frequency, and can't write grammatically correct sentences are worse than seeing a pixelated 16x24 sprite stretched to fit the board's avatar-space.

After all, many of the provided avatars are pixelated due to resizing issues (cf just about every SNES game), have coloring problems (FFT's portraits/summons, which look like they've been tossed into a noise filter of some kind; mainly the summons, the classes and such don't look too bad), or look weird because they were scaled down (FFT's chocobo, FF6's alexander/atma, etc.) And quite frankly, I don't think anyone is bothered by this.

--------------------

"Judge not a man by his thoughts and words, but by
the quality and quantity of liquor in his possession
and the likelyhood of him sharing."

I guess having custom avatars would be nice, since it is kinda messed up that only the admins get to have them. Of course, there is a wide selection of avatars in the gallery, but it's just kinda funky to not let everyone have a personalized avatar. Oh well. Custom sigs can get annoying though. But only if someone overdoes it. (It does make the boards look nice and clean though...)

--------------------

OSonic Rave
/ \Last Arcanum
[ ]Strike Raid
XRagnarok

None of the pixel sprites have been resized to anything other than an exact multiple (upwards) of their original size. None at all have been scaled down. It's quite different from the distortion of ill-fitting custom avatars being scaled to specific dimensions. If you see that kind of distortion, it's all in your mind.

Most of the FFT avatars are scanned IIRC, which is why they differ.

As for moderator approval of avatars/titles: a nice idea in theory, but we're all pretty short on time doing what we already do. This has traditionally been cited as the reason we don't do it.

The reason we don't do it without requiring mod approval is primarily cleanliness, as GMH suggested -- and also wanting to keep a cohesive Final Fantasy feel to the place. This is the kind of policy and look you used to see on the major FF forums back when I started getting interested, so I suppose in some ways we're doing a slightly "oldschool" style forum to go with the "oldschool" FF focus. (As they always did, folks with authority get custom perks, of course, partly as a way to easily tell them apart.)

That's just how we are. I think it adds to the charm, personally.

After seeing the general crassness, lameness, and overall lack of humor present in some people's signatures and member names, I'm glad that member titles and avatars are limited for most people. The CoN forums are much better looking than any of the other forums I've been to. You don't have to roll your eyes at stupid custom titles, be annoyed by ugly or offensive avatars, or scroll twice as much to get past someone's dumb sig with a huge picture in it.

--------------------

Veni, vidi, dormivi.

Quote

None of the pixel sprites have been resized to anything other than an exact multiple (upwards) of their original size. (...) If you see that kind of distortion, it's all in your mind.

Dunno man... I do have an active imagination, but I'm quite sober at the moment.

Quote

As for moderator approval of avatars/titles: a nice idea in theory, but we're all pretty short on time doing what we already do.  This has traditionally been cited as the reason we don't do it.

Even though signatures don't require it, and that avatars/titles are both on the same page as the signatures at all times? Screening troublesome signatures doesn't seem any different than this, frankly. No offense intended, but unless I'm missing something here, it just sounds like an excuse, not a reason.

Quote

That's just how we are.  I think it adds to the charm, personally.

Well hey, whatever works with the forum style/theme, frankly. But it just seems like an unecessary restriction to me... >"< We already get custom signatures, and some members with custom avatars and title don't even have FF-themed material in there. (I counted 4 avatars, out of 11 mods with avatars. That's over a third, which is hardly just a single isolated instance.)

So... if moderators don't keep in tune with the theme, and we already have customizable material that could require screening, AND titles and/or avatars are on the same page as the aforementionned material, I just don't see how this is anything more than a personal preference on the mods' part. Not that anyone can disagree with that, but there you go. >"< (I'm not trying to come off as a prick here, I'm just saying what I think about the situation. I mean no offense guys. )

Edit: I don't know how to use image tags, hurrrr~

This post has been edited by Silverlance on 18th March 2006 23:46

--------------------

"Judge not a man by his thoughts and words, but by
the quality and quantity of liquor in his possession
and the likelyhood of him sharing."

You raise an excellent point, SL. I'll close off the ability to have sigs as soon as I get around to it.

--------------------

"To create something great, you need the means to make a lot of really bad crap." - Kevin Kelly

Why aren't you shopping AmaCoN?

Quote (Rangers51 @ 18th March 2006 18:49)

You raise an excellent point, SL. I'll close off the ability to have sigs as soon as I get around to it.

Works just as well for me, frankly.

--------------------

"Judge not a man by his thoughts and words, but by
the quality and quantity of liquor in his possession
and the likelyhood of him sharing."

Quote (Silverlance)

Quote

None of the pixel sprites have been resized to anything other than an exact multiple (upwards) of their original size. (...) If you see that kind of distortion, it's all in your mind.

Dunno man... I do have an active imagination, but I'm quite sober at the moment.

I've fixed Atma Weapon now. Had no idea about that one. Please report any other distorted sprites to me. (It's quite funny that the reference example you provided was also shrunk though - CoN's own bestiary had the full size one.)

Quote (Silverlance)

Quote

As for moderator approval of avatars/titles: a nice idea in theory, but we're all pretty short on time doing what we already do.  This has traditionally been cited as the reason we don't do it.

Even though signatures don't require it, and that avatars/titles are both on the same page as the signatures at all times? Screening troublesome signatures doesn't seem any different than this, frankly. No offense intended, but unless I'm missing something here, it just sounds like an excuse, not a reason.

I explained in the following paragraph why we don't do it without requiring approval.

Quote (Silverlance)

Quote

That's just how we are.  I think it adds to the charm, personally.

Well hey, whatever works with the forum style/theme, frankly. But it just seems like an unecessary restriction to me... >"< We already get custom signatures, and some members with custom avatars and title don't even have FF-themed material in there. (I counted 4 avatars, out of 11 mods with avatars. That's over a third, which is hardly just a single isolated instance.)

I believe I also explained why mods are an exception. We've never required that the staff avatars be FF related, but they do have to keep with the general tone of the forum. They're meant to stand out as exceptions in some sense though.

To sum up: it is a matter of our style preference, and the reason others can't have the slight increase in freedom that the mods have is that that would require the described policing.

And it's not going to change.

Quote (Tiddles @ 18th March 2006 19:49)

To sum up: it is a matter of our style preference

Well if that's what it all boils down to, I'd much rather hear that than attempts to justify it. Like I said, I don't mean to come off as a prick (though I DO have a reputation to uphold ) but I'd rather things come out clear as they are than seeing them sweetened and distorted. If that last sentence made sense. >"<

--------------------

"Judge not a man by his thoughts and words, but by
the quality and quantity of liquor in his possession
and the likelyhood of him sharing."

But why would it matter if we just had a maximum avatar size? :confused: You want to keep a classic FF atmosphere? (That's what you said? I mean by just having FF avatars in the gallery.) Well, it really doesn't matter.

This post has been edited by Zeromus_X on 19th March 2006 01:01

--------------------

OSonic Rave
/ \Last Arcanum
[ ]Strike Raid
XRagnarok

Quote (Silverlance @ 18th March 2006 18:40)

We already get custom signatures, and some members with custom avatars and title don't even have FF-themed material in there. (I counted 4 avatars, out of 11 mods with avatars. That's over a third, which is hardly just a single isolated instance.)

I was under the impression that the rule was that custom avatars had to be video-game related, not necessarily FF-related. That's still in keeping with the general point of the forums.

--------------------

Veni, vidi, dormivi.

Quote (karasuman @ 18th March 2006 15:14)

After seeing the general crassness, lameness, and overall lack of humor present in some people's signatures and member names, I'm glad that member titles and avatars are limited for most people. The CoN forums are much better looking than any of the other forums I've been to. You don't have to roll your eyes at stupid custom titles, be annoyed by ugly or offensive avatars, or scroll twice as much to get past someone's dumb sig with a huge picture in it.

I totally agree with this


Though, when I first signed up for this site, I was quite disappointed to find that I couldn't have a custom avatar. I don't really care much for my own signature, but it is interesting to see what other people have placed in their own.

I wouldn't mind having a custom title once a person has reached beyond the set post ranks (not that that'll be any time soon for me)

I'm good with the current situation
several avatars to choose from, titles based on post, and a short customized signature...

unless you earn enough prestige to become a moderator, or something else

It's all good I would not change a thing.

--------------------

"Have you ever seen a baby do that before?"

I don't feel uncomfortable knowing options are closed off to me. Whoever said that things being offered without any reason behind them is right -- things lose their tarnish, and it just becomes a matter of convenience. I'd rather not see anyone with non-game avatars or weird custom titles if they haven't earned 'em, just because expectations don't equate to anything more than wishful thinking when you apply them elsewhere. I think I've said it before, but the site is kinda pristine in its own little way, and I wouldn't want them to deign it necessary to be like everywhere else, even if it takes a few presses of the button to appease everyone.

--------------------

It's gonna be a glorious day
I feel my luck can change

OK. Apparently, the main problem is you don't trust people to have custom avatars and signitures. Well, there's a simple thing: just allow them to haver them after, say, 150 posts. It's your job, admins, to prevent offensive material- therefore, if something you don't like is made, delete it. Simple as that.

Are there any other reasons you have for only allowing few members their own avatar and title?

--------------------

You say I'm weird: you're the person who is exited when you kick a leather testicle into a net.

Quote

Kill me, or else you a murderer!

I can think of a reason. This forum belongs to R51. If he doesn't want to allow custom avatars, then that's how it is. People who don't like it don't have to post here.

--------------------

I had an old signature. Now I've changed it.

It's not like I really care since I wanted a Zodiac avatar and I got it after waiting a while. I could have done one myself but this would have meant to take a screenshot of Zoddy, resize it, etc.

Showing your own images as avatars or signatures may reveal itself as stealing/modifying other people's work. I never said I've never done it though... I'm no good at drawing.

Customized ranks aren't important at all, you can type whatever you want in the location section; it's not like it will check to see if the location really exists on the map. You may also use the signature section to do so.

I wouldn't want anyone to change avatars. Why? I've got used to the currents avatars as people use them. And most of them are only used by one person on the forum. Like Leviathan for Shutonnova, Z(S?)iegfried for RuneLancer/Silverlance, Zodiac for me, though I hadn't the time to get used to that monochrome Ramza I liked it a lot.

If I would have to say something to newcomers, try not taking avatars already chosen by people who still frequents the forum, or it will confuse me badly.

--------------------

Sayonara

Quote (Franz Kefka Palazzo @ 20th March 2006 20:45)

OK. Apparently, the main problem is you don't trust people to have custom avatars and signitures. Well, there's a simple thing: just allow them to haver them after, say, 150 posts. It's your job, admins, to prevent offensive material- therefore, if something you don't like is made, delete it. Simple as that.

Are there any other reasons you have for only allowing few members their own avatar and title?

Style. And the fact that it's our decision.

It's our job to prevent offensive material, yes. How we choose to do it is up to us. In this case it's done by preventing custom avatars and titles at all, which is something we already do for other reasons, as stated previously.

There are plenty of forums that do allow this degree of customisation, which you're free to join. We're not one of them. That's just life.

Fair enough. End of topic.

--------------------

You say I'm weird: you're the person who is exited when you kick a leather testicle into a net.

Quote

Kill me, or else you a murderer!