Subject:
|
Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 7 Jan 2002 02:32:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1315 times
|
| |
|
|
Jeff Stembel wrote:
>
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> > Jeff Stembel wrote:
> > > As far as I'm concerned, posting the avatar images are a blatant abuse of
> > > the free service Kevin is providing to us as Lego fans.
> >
> > I don't see how these images are abuse. The TOS only requires that
> > images be related to LEGO products or be of general interest to the LEGO
> > community.
>
> My reasons for feeling they are abuse is due to the drowning out of content I,
> and other fans I speak to on a regular basis, am interested in, the bandwidth
> issues, and their general appearance. Frankly, I think they're ugly. I
> wouldn't complain if there was one or two per recent page, since there have
> been other things I've thought were ugly and didn't comment on.
I still don't see how they are abuse (now if a single individual had
uploaded say 1000 [or even 10] avatars each in their own folder so that
they dominated the recent updates pages, that might be abuse). To be
honest, I find the pages dominated by mecha almost as frustrating as the
pages dominated by avatars. Should Kevin consider banning pictures of
mecha? Is there any reason you feel they are abuse other than that they
are ugly and happen to be popular right now?
> I rarely check the Brickshelf recent page from home anymore because I have
> dialup, and downloading all of those avatar images is a waste of *my*
> bandwidth, and the only thing I can do about it is not look, which means I may
> very well miss viewing models I *am* interested in.
This is a valid concern, and Kevin should look at what can be done to
address that concern. I hope the solution doesn't include banning
avatars just because some folks find them ugly.
> > Unless one feels that Bionicle Zone is not part of the "LEGO
> > community" I would think that avatars for use on BZ would apply since
> > they are of general interest to the segment of the LEGO community which
> > uses BZ.
>
> Well, I rather doubt that all of them are reserved strictly for BZ, and
> honestly, I'd complain if Lugnet used a similar system and members here put the
> images up on Brickshelf.
Certainly if more than a few images are being used as avatars on chat
boards with no connection to LEGO that would be abuse. I would point out
though that Lugnet is somewhat similar to BZ in that it doesn't provide
space for people to host images. Do you think images for Lugnet hosted
pages should not be allowed on Brickshelf? If not, how are they
different from avatars for BZ?
> > The volume of them is large, and they may not interest as large a number
> > of us as pictures of the latest supper MOC,
>
> I submit they are of less interest to the general fan community than pics of
> any MOC whatsoever.
How can you possibly determine that? Also, should any measure of the
number of folks interested in a particular image (or other file) hosted
on Brickshelf in any way factor into it's appropriateness so long as it
is reasonably tied to LEGO fandom (and a chat board for Bionicle fans is
most definitely part of LEGO fandom)?
> > but what standard do we use to determine if an image is of "general interest
> > to the LEGO community"?
>
> I suppose whatever "we" can convince Kevin is of general interest to the fan
> community. :)
True.
> > How many people need to be interested in the picture for it to be
> > acceptable?
>
> Actually, I think it should be the other way around. If a lot of people
> complain, then maybe it isn't of general interest, hmm? :)
Oh, so if I somehow kick up a campaign to complain about one of your
pictures then they should be banned?
> Well, Kevin has said in the past that a few personal images are of general
> interest to the community, whereas family albums are not. ;)
So how is someone's "a few avatars" any different? (except that they may
be somewhat more relevant in that they are actually being used as part
of the person's identity on a LEGO fan site)?
> > - member folder pictures (example:
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?lsearch=andersson ) (these
> > pictures which serve the same purpose as avatars could be allowed while
> > banning similar images for other services, they also do not exist in the
> > normal Brickshelf space so presumably updates of them don't cause
> > something to appear in the recent updates pages).
>
> Those are almost never seen and take up very little space, and thus generate
> little bandwidth issues. :)
I think there are actually two separate issues here. I think Kevin will
have to tell us whether the bandwidth used by the avatars is a problem
(and just how much it actually is). The other problem which is clear and
I do support some kind of solution to minimize it is the impact on the
recent updates pages of the Gallery. Clearly few people browsing through
the gallery will find the avatars interesting (though someone looking to
create an avatar may want to search them). I submit also that few people
browsing the recent updates will find auction pictures interesting. What
I would support is some mechanism which would trim these images from the
recent updates.
> > Note that it would actually be easier to ban pictures for eBay and whatnot
> > since there a purpose is to use the image to get money.
>
> Kevin has specifically said, however, that he *wants* people to put their ebay
> and brickbay images on Brickshelf. In my opinion, even those images are of
> more interest to the general fan community than the avatar images, especially
> when viewing the recent page.
I wonder how many people actually care about any one individual auction
picture? Sure, some are probably pretty popular, but I bet overall their
attractiveness is low. Of course not many folks actually use Brickshelf
for their auction pictures, and those that do keep all the pictures in
one folder so are relatively friendly to the recent updates pages.
Frank
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
|
| (...) I think it is abuse because it seems like they're always some new ones, usually in the same folders or by the same people, they are of no interest to *anyone* I know browsing the recent page, and they are not showcasing models or ideas or Lego (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
122 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
