Now if I could only persuade Jeremy that those Splunk flash ads make the site look just as unprofessional & trashy as avatars would ....

Comparing an ad for a really useful product that is directly targeted at our demographic with avatars seems a bit disingenuous.

--jeremy

If avatars were allowed, this would be mine:
http://www.seeitornot.faketrix.com/f...ictures-61.htm

anyone who wants avatars could always start their own site and allow them. linux is all about having choices, after all. have fun.


<-- hates avatars. tends to like smileys though

I used to want avatrs in LQ, but that was before I started visiting ets...


Thank you Jeremy, that LQ doesn't have avatars.

Maybe this has come up (nope, I cannot be bothered to search), but doesn't Jeremy have an avatar? Or at least, what do we call this: http://images.linuxquestions.org/que...es/circle1.gif

We call that a privilage of being the site administrator

Translation: we don't object to avatars, we just object to them for some people (i.e., in this case, everyone but one). I don't particularly want or need an avatar, but the discrepancy struck me when I was reading some of the responses on this thread.

jeremy's avatar is used to show that the admin has posted. It gives a distinction and shows that a final descision has been made.

Telemachos: see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevol...tator_for_Life

I'm familiar with the concept. It's silly and not very persuasive to me in this case. But thanks for reminding me that Wikipedia has an entry for any damn thing you can imagine.

This is silly...I mean c'mon. Geez. And while I'm at it, thank you Jeremy & LQ staff for providing an incredible forum that I have found instrumental in my learning of Linux and many other computer issues. And I really don't care whether I ever see 1 or a million avatars on this site. It is a completely ridiculous issue to spend time debating.

Yup, I'll stop being a pain in the ass. I completely agree that the avatar issue is silly. I just found the tone of a lot of the posts really sanctimonious.

A little late to the thread, but here goes. . .

And what would mine be? That big white bear.

I've suggested that this thread be closed, as the topic of avatars has been discussed at length in the past, and the current direction of the discussion is rapidly moving away from being focused on the LQ site itself (which is the purpose of this subforum)

To recap, the original question about allowing avatars at LQ is legitimate, however, it's been covered extensively before (as a quick Search will reveal) and for all practical purposes there is nothing left to discuss. The site admin long ago made the decision to disable avatars for numerous reasons, including server performance considerations, bandwidth considerations, the difficulty in moderating potentially inappropriate images, etc, etc, and that decision is final. Perhaps some members may disagree with it, but it's also important to keep in mind that LQ is regularly used by IT professionals in an office setting, and thus it's critical avoid any unnecessary overhead in order to optimize the site's performance, as well as to avoid having potentially inappropriate images appear. This is a Linux technical site after all, and to paraphrase the LQ Rules, LQ is *not* your average web forum. Avatars simply do not enhance or provide useful Linux technical information, and would only serve to be considered distractions by many members, and therefore they've been disabled.

There is an existing thread in General which I think would be the appropriate place for any LQ'ers who want to post a link to their screenshot/image