Tweet
Sasq, could the avatars be a bit larger nowadays? Not in size, just dimensions, say something like 90x90. I don't think it would clutter the layout...
-
-
Also...why does Gurms avatar is 90x90 in 30KB?
-
Because I pre-approved it, and uploaded it manually.Originally posted by NowhereAlso...why does Gurms avatar is 90x90 in 30KB?
shall look at it.
hrm now there is an idea, maybe donating members can get 90x90
Juu nin to iro
English doesn't borrow from other languages. It follows them down dark alleys, knocks them over, and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.Comment
-
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO....not now when I finished avatar that ended 76x88 (but it's only 3KB) Comment
-
Personally, I like the smaller avatar size. I'm not a fan of "large" avatars on forums. tends to distract from where the actual focus should be."And yet, after spending 20+ years trying to evolve the user interface into something better, what's the most powerful improvement Apple was able to make? They finally put a god damned shell back in." -jwz
Comment
-
The actual focus should be... on the bouncing boobies.The Internet - where men are men, women are men, and teenage girls are FBI agents!
I'm the least you could do
If only life were as easy as you
I'm the least you could do, oh yeah
If only life were as easy as you
I would still get screwedComment
-
<----- Focus NOW!!!
I'm good with the current size, besides I don't want to resize mine anyways, it never comes ou right.Titanium is the new bling!
(you heard from me first!)Comment
-
I'm struggling to see the need or use for larger avatars, in dimensions. Larger file size, maybe, but I agree with DGhost that smaller is better and less distracting.
We already have signatures that take up more room than a post, do we really need avatars that do the same?“And, remember: there's no 'I' in 'irony'†~ Merlin MannComment
-
But if you look at the current layout, there's a still unused place "around" current 75x75 avatar, they could be slightly larger IMHO without harm. As for distractions...I think animated ones are more distracting than a bit larger static...so perhaps we'll limit size to 10KB? (mortal fear fell on Zokes )
Comment
-
I have enough trouble as it is at work now that for some reason we seem to think close-ups of heaving chests (where is implication is she is having sex) are acceptable for this forum. (And no, I don't want to turn Avs off).
Keep 'em small and use some taste - this is a forum with standards, standards that used to be higher.FT.Comment
-
good point, can we go back at least to only covered pixilated breasts guys.Juu nin to iro
English doesn't borrow from other languages. It follows them down dark alleys, knocks them over, and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.Comment
-
LOL, thanks Dan
FT.Comment
-
Is mine still good or is it floating between acceptable and un-acceptable? I wouldn't want my av to cause any trouble for anyone.
I am the one who kinda started the whole bouncing fad, but I had mine WAY before the others though.
Titanium is the new bling!
(you heard from me first!)Comment
-
Uhm for the masters and slaves of ultimate boucniness.....could we not have a switch in our profiles to disable loading them?
I *am* a paying member, so I do think I am entitled to at least some enticing avatars.Join MURCs Distributed Computing effort for Rosetta@Home and help fight Alzheimers, Cancer, Mad Cow disease and rising oil prices.
[...]the pervading principle and abiding test of good breeding is the requirement of a substantial and patent waste of time. - VeblenComment
-
will look into it when i have time to sleepOriginally posted by UmfriendJuu nin to iro
English doesn't borrow from other languages. It follows them down dark alleys, knocks them over, and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.Comment
Comment