Home Page
   Articles
       links
About Us    
Traders        
Recipes            
Latest Articles
Avatars
Page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Site guidelines, Announcements, Problems and Suggestions
Author 
 Message
Mr O



Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Posts: 5512
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 10 6:40 pm    Post subject: Re: Avatars Reply with quote
    

Jamanda wrote:

Our members have voted that we do not permit moving images as avatars.


How did you work that out? 65 votes in total, hardly even a snapshot of the membership. Personaly I am not bothered either way but I did vote. It seems to me that 29 members don't like moving images and the rest dont give a s***, so it is in reality an overwhelming vote to leave the images moving, I would say?

Gervase



Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 8655

PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 10 6:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

TBH, 65 is probably more than the number of active regular posters over the past week, so in that sense it is representative. As in real life, if people don't vote, then they can't really grumble about the result of an election. After all, would you be happy if fewer than 50 per cent of the populatilon voted for a change of government, but because the unsung majority didn't express a preference, the government remained the same?

ETA: That said, polls regarding the site itself used to be time specific, whereas the new one is vague. This issue of moving avatars doesn't really register on my flying-fartometer, though, so I have no real views on the poll.

Mr O



Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Posts: 5512
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 10 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Gervase wrote:
TBH, 65 is probably more than the number of active regular posters over the past week, so in that sense it is representative. As in real life, if people don't vote, then they can't really grumble about the result of an election. After all, would you be happy if fewer than 50 per cent of the populatilon voted for a change of government, but because the unsung majority didn't express a preference, the government remained the same?

ETA: That said, polls regarding the site itself used to be time specific, whereas the new one is vague. This issue of moving avatars doesn't really register on my flying-fartometer, though, so I have no real views on the poll.


Wording is equally important. A poll should simply say " If you object to moving Avatars Vote here " those that don't care need not even vote, which is the fairest way I feel. Otherwise we give an over credence to those that do object.

The way it is at the moment, it seems like if you complain, then you get your way, cos no one else is really bothered.

marigold



Joined: 02 Sep 2005
Posts: 12458
Location: West Sussex
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 10 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Not giving a sh*t is not the same as being in favour. It could equally be seen as being anti. It's irrelevant.

Mr O



Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Posts: 5512
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 10 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

marigold wrote:
Not giving a sh*t is not the same as being in favour. It could equally be seen as being anti. It's irrelevant.


Totaly disagree," not giving a s888" or not interested etc. etc. means, it is not an issue. Therefore not against the moving bits. Simple really.

Marionb



Joined: 27 Aug 2006
Posts: 5266
Location: Mid-Wales
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 10 9:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Moving avatars are obviously something that can have an adverse effect on some people.... they may suffer from migraines/epilepsy etc so I think this should be taken into account. Because only a minority of Downsizers are likely to suffer these ailments then only a minority are likely to understand the relevance of such a vote.

I have a disability myself and I like to think that if something that was occuring on this site was giving me problems then others would be sympathetic and make amends to help if possible.. especially if the solution was something relatively simple and achievable.

Mr O



Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Posts: 5512
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 10 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Marionb wrote:
Moving avatars are obviously something that can have an adverse effect on some people.... they may suffer from migraines/epilepsy etc so I think this should be taken into account. Because only a minority of Downsizers are likely to suffer these ailments then only a minority are likely to understand the relevance of such a vote.

I have a disability myself and I like to think that if something that was occuring on this site was giving me problems then others would be sympathetic and make amends to help if possible.. especially if the solution was something relatively simple and achievable.
Hi Marion
I do agree with you, but also feel that the reason this thread has happened is for other reasons.

toggle



Joined: 30 Dec 2006
Posts: 11622
Location: truro
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 10 9:28 pm    Post subject: Re: Avatars Reply with quote
    

Mr O wrote:
Jamanda wrote:

Our members have voted that we do not permit moving images as avatars.


How did you work that out? 65 votes in total, hardly even a snapshot of the membership. Personaly I am not bothered either way but I did vote. It seems to me that 29 members don't like moving images and the rest dont give a s***, so it is in reality an overwhelming vote to leave the images moving, I would say?


65 is a fair proportion of the membership that post on a very regular basis.

Mr O



Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Posts: 5512
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 10 11:36 pm    Post subject: Re: Avatars Reply with quote
    

toggle wrote:
Mr O wrote:
Jamanda wrote:

Our members have voted that we do not permit moving images as avatars.


How did you work that out? 65 votes in total, hardly even a snapshot of the membership. Personaly I am not bothered either way but I did vote. It seems to me that 29 members don't like moving images and the rest dont give a s***, so it is in reality an overwhelming vote to leave the images moving, I would say?


65 is a fair proportion of the membership that post on a very regular basis.

Do you really think so? Is it a real reflection of all the members? Regardless if they post often or not? Post counts are irrelevant in my eyes. Perhaps you feel they are more important than I do?

toggle



Joined: 30 Dec 2006
Posts: 11622
Location: truro
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 10 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

i made no mention of post count at all.

A lot of the membership list is inactives, people who drift in for a specific reason and then do not return or people who were once active members and have left. the actual regularly posting membership is fairly small.

I would suspect that polls that you agree with the result of would not be criticised in a similar manner.

Mr O



Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Posts: 5512
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
PostPosted: Tue Apr 13, 10 1:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

toggle wrote:
i made no mention of post count at all.

A lot of the membership list is inactives, people who drift in for a specific reason and then do not return or people who were once active members and have left. the actual regularly posting membership is fairly small.

I would suspect that polls that you agree with the result of would not be criticised in a similar manner.


All irrelevant.

pricey



Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Posts: 6444

PostPosted: Tue Apr 13, 10 8:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Well i wasn't going to say anything, yesterday lunch time I was fuming, but the wife told me not to say anything, but I read more of this, this morning and well.....

The poll did not even last 24 hours and It was on a Sunday!! how many people post on a Sunday? So the "Mods" think this is OK? who made the decision.

Only 47 people voted on Sally's new poll so it was not 65!

What Has DS become? I feel let down and disappointed, I really thought this was a fair, site, but now I don't feel this way at all.

I like Mr O don't give a s**t, either way, but just make it fair, for god sake, this has been done very, I'm whats the word?

Also who do you complain to? is there some one who is not a Mod, who is impartial? no thought not, it stinks!!!!!

jema
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 26979
Location: escaped from Swindon
PostPosted: Tue Apr 13, 10 8:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

The poll just reaffirmed the long standing position, it hardly needed to run for long to get that view confirmed.

I don't agree with the result myself, but for flips sake on a scale of importance this hardly registers with me at all.

Treacodactyl
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 25697
Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism
PostPosted: Tue Apr 13, 10 8:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

pricey wrote:
Only 47 people voted on Sally's new poll so it was not 65!


It would need at least 65 people to vote to change the decision.

As the original poll ( https://forum.downsizer.net/about26420.html ) had been running since 2007 and 70% didn't want moving avatars I, personally, didn't think there was much need for a new poll anyway.

I, like many, don't really mind either way but as I understand some people really don't like them I'm happy to no have moving avatars.

toggle



Joined: 30 Dec 2006
Posts: 11622
Location: truro
PostPosted: Tue Apr 13, 10 3:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Mr O wrote:
toggle wrote:
i made no mention of post count at all.

A lot of the membership list is inactives, people who drift in for a specific reason and then do not return or people who were once active members and have left. the actual regularly posting membership is fairly small.

I would suspect that polls that you agree with the result of would not be criticised in a similar manner.


All irrelevant.


why?

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Site guidelines, Announcements, Problems and Suggestions All times are GMT
Page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2
View Latest Posts View Latest Posts

 

Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group
Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
Copyright 2004 marsjupiter.com