A recent controversy has arisen with regard to Registered Visitor avatar content. This is being discussed in the moderator's forum. As of right now, the policy is:

NOTE: It may require 10 posts in 'business' threads before a Registered Visitor can post an avatar.

1. No animated avatars. The motion distracts from visitor user experience.
2. No web address or other form of contact in avatar.
3. Company logo for avatar allowed if the Registered Visitor is active in forum discussions. Minimum number of posts may be required -- Possibly a 50 post minimum. Cases of company logos will be decided on a case by case basis.
4. No religious or political avatars.
5. No vulgar or other 'controversial' pictures.

Everyone's input, opinions, thoughts here in this thread are appreciated.

Hi Marc,

I think that the company's logo for Avtar should not be allowed,since this tantamount to advertisement.

/Umang :cool:

Some of us just being here could be construed as advertisement.:lol:

Some of us just being here could be construed as advertisement.:lol:Do we have any proscription against using one for an organization of which we cannot afford to be a member? (say the Emperors Club VIP?:notme:)

The prohibitive cost for me is a healthy fear of being a victim of "spousecide" if my spouse ever found out.

Of course, I'm a guy who values his membership in the United States Golf Association as much [maybe more] than my American Society for Quality membership. (At least the USGA gives me a personalized bag tag and golf cap every year for my dues!)

Hi Marc,

I think that the company's logo for Avtar should not be allowed,since this tantamount to advertisement.

/Umang :cool:

I find myself agreeing with Umang here. As a rule, a general guideline, the less "advertising" per se we avoid, the better. I think an avatar should be a picture of you or one of the provided avatars. :2cents:

I find myself agreeing with Umang here. As a rule, a general guideline, the less "advertising" per se we avoid, the better. I think an avatar should be a picture of you or one of the provided avatars. :2cents: In all of this, we have to consider 'legacy' avatars of a few people who have been around for quite a while, and who have been significant contributors with respect to helping people. I think they should be 'grandfathered'.

Forums cannot be held responsible if someone uses a copyrighted logo / picture (a registered trademark or whatever) as their avatar without proper authorization from the copyright holder.

I think an avatar should be a picture of you or one of the provided avatars. :2cents:
I think this would be a shame - I have used my avatar for several years in different places, it is neither a picture of me or a standard avatar, but I don't believe it contravenes any rules. It is certainly much better looking than a picture of me!

A degree of common sense is called for - nothing offensive, animated, blatantly advertising. I am sure the moderators already use a "moral compass" on this, although it never hurts to have some guidelines in the FAQ.

Jimmy

I would like to think that in this world of frustration and hostility - Tennessee and Chumley give a good belly laugh before the words of the thread are even looked at.

The instigating discussion was mostly aimed at people with company avatars and how that plays into the forum with respect to 'advertising'.

This isn't a big problem, but the question did come up amongst the moderators last week. The intent is to set a policy. I don't think Tennessee and Chumley, and *most* individual avatars, are an issue.

Well, my avitar, used to be my license plate. I allowed it to expire.... I guess that means that someone else could have that as their plate.......


hmmm.....................

In all of this, we have to consider 'legacy' avatars of a few people who have been around for quite a while, and who have been significant contributors with respect to helping people. I think they should be 'grandfathered'.

Yes. I greatly appreciate approaching all matters here on contribution and tenure. Grandfather is a good term and approach.

Forums cannot be held responsible if someone uses a copyrighted logo / picture (a registered trademark or whatever) as their avatar without proper authorization from the copyright holder.

Atul, excellent point! Whatever we use, we should make sure it's OK.

I think this would be a shame - I have used my avatar for several years in different places, it is neither a picture of me or a standard avatar, but I don't believe it contravenes any rules. It is certainly much better looking than a picture of me!

A degree of common sense is called for - nothing offensive, animated, blatantly advertising. I am sure the moderators already use a "moral compass" on this, although it never hurts to have some guidelines in the FAQ.

Jimmy

Jimmy, as always, nicely stated. I agree with you, and would modify my approach a bit.

As to your common sense and moral compass, generally that is the approach. My comments here were less about making blanket statements regarding existing avatars, but more about FAQ/TOS when people first come here.

Some of the avatars are getting pretty involved, with such a large audience, they can become quite interesting:D. So like you suggested, the better we can make something up front, the less situations are being dealt with.

I would like to think that in this world of frustration and hostility - Tennessee and Chumley give a good belly laugh before the words of the thread are even looked at.

As a fan of the Three Stooges, a good picture giving a laugh is always good.:yes:

Well, my avitar, used to be my license plate. I allowed it to expire.... I guess that means that someone else could have that as their plate.......

hmmm.....................

Well, why don't you just secure the rights to the image?? Sure they can use the license plate, but not the image!:lmao::lol:

Can't we all just get along?

:notme:really starting to wonder where you are all finding the spare time to discuss some topics... lol, yes I know...here I am too!

Since personal information is in profile, including work info...what is the big deal? Yes it is advertising...but as Randy referenced so are so many other posting, comments, etc... How do you really expect to police all of it?

If you want cotrol - limit to the standard avatars (although I bet someone will even find something offensive there too). If you want restrictions, create an avatar committee. Anyone wanting a non standard avatar must get approval first.

Personally, I couldn't care less about folks avatars.
my :2cents: worth, Eileen

Can't we all just get along?


Ah... heck, Eileen. You're old school. You should know this is about as tame as it gets!:lol:


:notme:really starting to wonder where you are all finding the spare time to discuss some topics... lol, yes I know...here I am too!



Yea.. you said what I was thinking!! :D

Plus... all the good subjects have been beat to death. We could talk about... Six Sigma, or.. does that ruler really need to be calibrated?? :lmao:

In all serious... I enjoy us talking about things and learning from each other; finding out what each see as the rules to play by. Whether it's grown folks on a discussion board or three kids playing ball, you have to have rules. And.. as you see kids formulate rules for their activity, so does Marc allow us input here on those things that are OK and those that are Taboo.

Plus... all the good subjects have been beat to death. We could talk about... Six Sigma, or.. does that ruler really need to be calibrated?? :lmao:

:topic:
Okay, this is OT, but can't be passed up - :cool:

Actually the ruler DOES need to be 'verified' as matching your tool/equipment measurement guides! Should have seen the look my DH gave me when I asked if he had done the verification of his measurement tools before starting the project (he's just finished building my studio). :evidence: :confused:

In the beginning when they (hubby and 2 sons) were using three different tape measures and then setting up equipment (table saw, miter saw, etc...) using the equip ruler scale. We did end up having to scrap out one tape measure (don't remember the off-brand but it was different enough to potentially casue problems).

Even though proven right to check, I was subsequently barred from the construction zone...except to bring drinks and snacks :lol:

:topic:
Even though proven right to check, I was subsequently barred from the construction zone...except to bring drinks and snacks :lol:

Oh, no, they didn't! Now see, if you "got" to bring them their drinks, you get monitoring rights!:biglaugh:

Nothing that can be construed as truely offensive to others or cause opposition, not related to the content and premise of the forum or not suitable for any U18 that may visit (I.e. the political, sexual, racial, religious etc.......) End of story.

Though really, I feel most should be able to have whatever they like, an expression of them, their personality, their approach. I too feel we think about some of these things too much, forums can become police states.

I have not yet seen an avatar in these forums that offends or I feel is inappropriate, do the current rules not cut it? They seem to be effective.

Maybe we could have a mufti day on a Friday, where we can have a less professional avatar!

I have not yet seen an avatar in these forums that offends or I feel is inappropriate, do the current rules not cut it? They seem to be effective. There has not been a significant issue. However, some people are more sensitive than others. There was a 'report' on someone's avatar, the moderators discussed it and we thought it best to discuss and set a policy - Thus, this thread.

We're not looking to make everyone have professional avatars. The main issue is potentially offensive avatars and avatars with 'covert advertisements'.

There has not been a significant issue. However, some people are more sensitive than others. There was a 'report' on someone's avatar, the moderators discussed it and we thought it best to discuss and set a policy - Thus, this thread.

We're not looking to make everyone have professional avatars. The main issue is potentially offensive avatars and avatars with 'covert advertisements'.Not only covert ads, but some were plain out-and-out OVERT ads!

Forums cannot be held responsible if someone uses a copyrighted logo / picture (a registered trademark or whatever) as their avatar without proper authorization from the copyright holder.

:agree:Definitely

Some of us just being here could be construed as advertisement.:lol: ... For better or for worse, eh? :lmao:

BTW: Post 1 (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=240240&postcount=1) updated.