Have to ask. Why is one limited to a teeny 50x50 px image for a custom avatar, when those provided in-house are all 80x80? Seems a little unfair to limited simply due to wanting to express a little more of one's own personality. Can't all avatars have the 80x80 size option?? And any reason on the non-animated GIFs not being supported/allowed? Again, just allows users to express a little more of themselves in the site, which is always a good thing (so long as site appropriate of course :) )
kaninelupus
275
Practically a Posting Shark
Recommended Answers
Jump to PostDonate :)
Jump to PostDonate :)
Or be a member since the time that animated-avatars were still allowed and never change it, like I did. (yes it is animated) :)
All 8 Replies
William Hemsworth
1,339
Posting Virtuoso
Donate :)
Nick Evan
4,005
Industrious Poster
Team Colleague
Featured Poster
Donate :)
Or be a member since the time that animated-avatars were still allowed and never change it, like I did. (yes it is animated) :)
William Hemsworth
1,339
Posting Virtuoso
Or be a member since the time that animated-avatars were still allowed and never change it, like I did. (yes it is animated) :)
Heh, I actually noticed the blink quite some time ago.
I think samaru took full advantage of the old default restrictions :P with a 120px x 120px avatar.
Also, in Area 51, John A complains about the same thing you did here kaninelupus, but he never got a reply.
kaninelupus
275
Practically a Posting Shark
Heh, I actually noticed the blink quite some time ago.
I think samaru took full advantage of the old default restrictions :P with a 120px x 120px avatar.Also, in Area 51, John A complains about the same thing you did here kaninelupus, but he never got a reply.
Hmmm... does make one think. Does not that turn the "donation" into a "subscription fee"? Not against subscriptions, but all for calling things what they truly are.
William Hemsworth
1,339
Posting Virtuoso
Hmmm... does make one think. Does not that turn the "donation" into a "subscription fee"? Not against subscriptions, but all for calling things what they truly are.
Well, the money helps to keep the site running, and to try and get as many people as possible to donate, they give them as many advantages as possible to convince you to do it too. After all, to solve your problem, aaaaall you need to do is donate! :)
sknake
1,622
Senior Poster
Featured Poster
Hmmm... does make one think. Does not that turn the "donation" into a "subscription fee"? Not against subscriptions, but all for calling things what they truly are.
You are "subscribed" to daniweb right now for free... so it wouldn't be a "subscription fee", right? Unless you want to call it a "premium subscription fee"... but really, what does it matter?
Even then its just something to get further confused with. Right now you can "subscribe" to forums, threads, groups, or discussions, etc with email notification options. Then you would have a daniweb subscription option in addition to the existing subscription options.
I think it is fine the way it is.
Salem
5,138
Posting Sage
> Donate
I do - time, and lots of it (as do the ~100 or so regulars who help out here).
How is that any less valuable than $5 per month subscription?
Paying the server bills is one thing, but without a lively volunteer community to drive things along, it would be a barren landscape of unanswered posts followed by unvisited website. At which point, server fees would be a moot point.
lllllIllIlllI
178
Veteran Poster
Yeah well i must say, reading this thread caused me to restart my sponsorship... For 6 months this time.
:P
Be a part of the DaniWeb community
We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.