Getting my avatar back

[arakura]

 

It doesn't come off as a minor side affair. Not everyone has access to the staff forum where these things are discussed.

This. I read probably five times as much about this whole gif debacle than the supposed reason for the ban, which is the derailment. (though it might just be selective pasting from Sanada...)

[SanadaShadow]

This. I read probably five times as much about this whole gif debacle than the supposed reason for the ban, which is the derailment. (though it might just be selective pasting from Sanada...)

 

Nah. I posted the entire pre-second ban conversation. I will admit that the first ban was my fault. I left out the questions Steve decided not to answer though, if it matters.

[Darklord Rooke]

I've been banned on other forums, and the reason is clearly relayed. No confusion. This whole saga has obviously resulted in confusion on the person being banned, but more importantly has inflicted that default avatar on the majority of the forum for many days now.

 

Change your avatar please!

[SanadaShadow]

This is okay, right?

[Darklord Rooke]

Looks 'bitchin'

[Nosebleed]

GIF avatars are really annoying but not ban worthy.

Your second avatar was ridiculously stretched in height which made it annoying and i personally believe in removal of such avatars, but again, not ban worthy.

I wasn't the one issuing the bans but if i had i would have given you examples of stuff you did wrong and i've dealt with some of the stuff that got reported so i know there was several instances where your behavior was not appropriate, but that's another discussion.

To put it simply, you were not banned for your avatar and i'm sorry Steve didn't properly explain it to you.

So just use a normal avatar you want as long as it doesn't breach the rules.

[SanadaShadow]

Rooke, on 04 Sept 2014 - 12:59 AM, said:

 

Looks 'bitchin'

 

Yoshino is always awesome.

 

There isn't any rule like 'no swearing on the avatar', right?

[Keaton]

Rooke, on 04 Sept 2014 - 12:59 AM, said:

 

Looks 'bitchin'

 

Yoshino is always awesome.

 

There isn't any rule like 'no swearing on the avatar', right?

Read the rules

[Darklord Rooke]

I would personally consider gifs being force-changed to go under a blanket "don't be a dick" rule, given how annoying it is - this isn't really power abuse. The mario posted is annoying as fuck. There are a few people (one?) who have very subtly animated signatures, which could be an exception. There's this other guy who also has a signature with a lot of movement, and yes I would like to see this removed as well.

 

The problem with this is that “not being a dick” and things which are “annoying” are subjective experiences. A number of people, for example, think lolis are annoying as fuck. What would happen if they grouped together to send a hundred complaints to the staff team every day? There’s also a … “certain pairing” on these forums who think it’s fun to have identical avatars and signatures. I personally find that VERY distracting when they post one after another.

 

Either allow .gifs or not. This ‘subjective’ thing has drama written all over it.

[crunchytaco]

Not to be the funny guy here (I changed my avatar before reading this), but this is probably the first forum I've ever heard complaints about GIF avatars being annoying. 

Communication should be clear and direct. Side-stepping the issue and/or letting someone else handle your business, only builds a mountain out of a molehill.

 

Hearing that there was an "invisible mass" of complaints against you isn't very helpful. All it builds is suspicion and resentment. 

 

 

I know that there are few people here who like to be snide and snarky. The minute I call them out, they'll retreat but I'm willing to bet those are the same people lodging invisible complaints in the background if what Steve says is true.

[SanadaShadow]

I was kinda wondering why they didn't just call me out. I contemplated whether or not to mention this to Steve, but I figured he was annoyed enough.

[crunchytaco]

I was kinda wondering why they didn't just call me out. I contemplated whether or not to mention this to Steve, but I figured he was annoyed enough.

 

Chances are if that statement was issued to you like that, you wouldn't yield any kind of useful answer so there was no point in asking. I can think up a few answers like "protecting identity," and all that.

 

There's no reason for intimidation to enter the equation at any point to stop you from asking a question. 

[nohman]

Not that I have a *cough* stake or anything in the matter , but I kind of agree with Zakamutt. I know that leads to a lot of subjectivity and that's a nightmare from a administration stand point, but in a community as small as ours "common sense" type rules like "don't be a dick" are manageable. Of course, then again, I'm on the user side of things so I don't know if you guys spend a lot of time dealing with inane complaints from the userbase, so for all I know it really could be far more trouble than it's worth.

 

It's probably as Rooke says; a rule one way or another is the most practical. Personally I wouldn't be too bummed if the they were prohibited, but at the same time an obnoxious image that I can just usually scroll past doesn't impact my forum experience negatively.

 

The whole thing is kind of silly and trivial to be honest, but I suppose a whole bunch of trivialities is the foundation for communication.

[SilverLi]

My opinion is that you were banned for several different things:
1. You are/were annoying. You kind of spammed everywhere on every topic in the whole forum. Bringing old topics alive and such. I don't say it is bad but you were really active. I think people could've been annoyed by the fact they saw you everywhere and maybe mistook you for a troll or something.

2. My personal opinion is that the picture you were using wasn't the problem but it was excessive out from the masses. Gif pictures aren't that normal on this forum. I think I have only seen around three different avatars wit a gif. Signatures are a lot more common with gifs.

3. You are strong willed and don't back down. With what I just wrote this could've easily provoked people.

 

A mixture of everything and people recognize you in a negative way.

 

But what I am most disturbed of is that you bring this up to the public. Keep it private and try to at least figure it out. If you can't discuss with Steve ask another moderator for justice. I do not like when people "cry" in the open when they could've possibly been treated unfairly.

[Ezeefreak]

My opinion is that you were banned for several different things:

1. You are/were annoying. You kind of spammed everywhere on every topic in the whole forum. Bringing old topics alive and such. I don't say it is bad but you were really active. I think people could've been annoyed by the fact they saw you everywhere and maybe mistook you for a troll or something.

2. My personal opinion is that the picture you were using wasn't the problem but it was excessive out from the masses. Gif pictures aren't that normal on this forum. I think I have only seen around three different avatars wit a gif. Signatures are a lot more common with gifs.

3. You are strong willed and don't back down. With what I just wrote people could've been easily provoked people.

 

A mixture of everything and people notice you in a negative way.

 

But what I am most disturbed of is that you bring this up to the public. Keep it private and try to at least figure it out. If you can't discuss with Steve ask another moderator for justice. I do not like when people "cry" in the open when they could've possibly been treated unfairly.

 

Good and appropriate Summary ... But luckily there is a ignore function now and everybody can decide by themself...

 

Greetz

 

PS: Sorry SilverLi for "copying" your Avatar, but I couldn't hold back anymore 

[Darklord Rooke]

My opinion is that you were banned for several different things:

1. You are/were annoying. You kind of spammed everywhere on every topic in the whole forum. Bringing old topics alive and such. I don't say it is bad but you were really active. I think people could've been annoyed by the fact they saw you everywhere and maybe mistook you for a troll or something.

2. My personal opinion is that the picture you were using wasn't the problem but it was excessive out from the masses. Gif pictures aren't that normal on this forum. I think I have only seen around three different avatars wit a gif. Signatures are a lot more common with gifs.

3. You are strong willed and don't back down. With what I just wrote this could've easily provoked people.

 

A mixture of everything and people recognize you in a negative way.

 

But what I am most disturbed of is that you bring this up to the public. Keep it private and try to at least figure it out. If you can't discuss with Steve ask another moderator for justice. I do not like when people "cry" in the open when they could've possibly been treated unfairly.

 

Hmmm...Being annoying, resurrecting old topics, Activity level of users, possessing an excessive avatar and having a strong will? I think you’ll find that none of these are bannable offences. Derailing and off-topicness is, but that rule has been (until recently) inconsistently applied.

 

Regarding your issue with him whining to the forum, the topic was started as a question to the anonymous ones who submitted complaints. A perfectly legitimate topic. Considering his question was based off an incorrect imterpretation of the warning Steve gave him, an analysis was only natural. 

[Nayleen]

I can see why you would've been banned - temporarily that is - over the stuff that went down back then, but your avatar certainly wasn't the reason, even if it was annoying. About a year back animated .gifs as avatars weren't even a thing, because the forum software would take the first frame of it and use that as your image.

 

Since signatures were mentioned already I'll give my two cents about them as well: I'm fine with animated gifs and signatures, as long as they're not super obnoxious and big in file size. Nohman's signature and crunchytaco's avatar are the perfect examples here - subtle and small (29 and 55 KB, respectively). All's good.

 

Then there's Monmon's current and old signatures, at 5.37 and and about 10 MB respectively, which I'm not okay with. The entirety of the forum's frontpage weighs in at 422 KB, just short of 8% (4%) in size compared to a single signature. Seriously, a single signature / avatar shouldn't bloat up the site's bandwidth requirement by a factor of 13 (24). That's the kind of stuff that grinds my gears, but I'm also anal about page load times and providing everyone with an awesome experience when browsing a site.

[Mr Poltroon]

My view on the avatar: 

I certainly have no issue with gifs, and I don't see how they could possibly annoy a person, but that's just me.

 

My view on the whole banning act:

A member was banned, but he did not know the correct reason as to why. 

Isn't it pretty clear who messed up here? Whomever issued the warnings was unclear enough to cause confusion, and remember, this is the internet, common sense and logic aren't actual things here, you have to be bloody clear with these matter to get them across to 'some' people.

He also publicly stated time and time again that he thought he was banned because of the avatar, it seems weird that no staff member would dare to enlighten him. Then again, trolls are a thing on the internet, and due to Sanada's offense it would not be unusual to assume he was just trolling.

[Kaguya]

The problem with this is that “not being a dick” and things which are “annoying” are subjective experiences. A number of people, for example, think lolis are annoying as fuck. What would happen if they grouped together to send a hundred complaints to the staff team every day? There’s also a … “certain pairing” on these forums who think it’s fun to have identical avatars and signatures. I personally find that VERY distracting when they post one after another.

 

Either allow .gifs or not. This ‘subjective’ thing has drama written all over it.

We don't double-post, so you should be able to figure it out just by reading the name of the first one. Well, if you want to be extra safe, just read the username every time. That can't possibly take much effort or distract you too much~

 

That said, the gif avatars are allowed in most cases. There should be no reason for them to be removed, as long as they're not against other rules we have (like showing pornography, for example)

The reasons for banning Sanada are different, and the staff apologizes for the lack of clarity in that. It won't happen in the future again.

 

Also, regarding a previous remark in another post- we currently don't have many active staff members, so it's very possible that we'll miss on some derailing. Two or three people browsing the forums are not enough to cover every topic, so even long pages of derailing can possibly go unnoticed if they're not reported. With board mods coming, this will change soon, though. Until then, please just report any stance of derailing, and we will take care of it. It's not like we're trying to have double standards or anything like that.

[arakura]

I personally think the paired avatar and signature is awesome. Nico and Maki are cute, so seeing them twice as often is wonderful!

Also, mods should be clear about the reasons for bans. Gif avatars have never really bothered me, but Nayleen is right when he says keep the file size low

[Kendjin]

Steve is no longer an admin. Also as you can see I have an animated avatar.

 

If you put up an avatar that is not acceptable, you'll get a PM before any bans.

 

Mods are now clear about bans, I can't go back in time, but I can tell you, you'll know exactly why you are banned if it happens.

[SanadaShadow]

I can see why you would've been banned - temporarily that is - over the stuff that went down back then, but your avatar certainly wasn't the reason, even if it was annoying. About a year back animated .gifs as avatars weren't even a thing, because the forum software would take the first frame of it and use that as your image.

 

Since signatures were mentioned already I'll give my two cents about them as well: I'm fine with animated gifs and signatures, as long as they're not super obnoxious and big in file size. Nohman's signature and crunchytaco's avatar are the perfect examples here - subtle and small (29 and 55 KB, respectively). All's good.

 

Then there's Monmon's current and old signatures, at 5.37 and and about 10 MB respectively, which I'm not okay with. The entirety of the forum's frontpage weighs in at 422 KB, just short of 8% (4%) in size compared to a single signature. Seriously, a single signature / avatar shouldn't bloat up the site's bandwidth requirement by a factor of 13 (24). That's the kind of stuff that grinds my gears, but I'm also anal about page load times and providing everyone with an awesome experience when browsing a site.

[Nosebleed]

Since everything's been cleared out, I'll be closing this topic now.