By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Website Topics - New Avatar & Sig Rules

amp316 said:
MontanaHatchet said:
To address the issue:

While I'm reluctant to compare the two sites so often, on NeoGAF signatures aren't even allowed and I can probably only think of one shirtless avatar that I remember from the site (which wasn't outright sexual and has now been changed). Obviously the rule can be tweaked and changed but the level of inappropriate avatars was becoming excessive. Regardless of where you're browsing the site from, no one needs to see hyper-sexualized avatars of shirtless men as well as women in bikinis just because they want to read some news on their favorite games. The rule is still up for discussion but I'd ask for people to be mature on the issue and discuss it in a civil manner.


I have a suggestion.  For people that it bothers maybe there should be an option to turn off the avatar pics.

This doesn't account for lurkers or people who are new to the site (not to mention one shouldn't have to block every avatar or specific ones just to avoid inappropriate ones).



 

 

Around the Network
crissindahouse said:
no i won't because i respect others and what they like to use as avatar...


you have to draw the line somewhere



                                
MontanaHatchet said:
To address the issue:

While I'm reluctant to compare the two sites so often, on NeoGAF signatures aren't even allowed and I can probably only think of one shirtless avatar that I remember from the site (which wasn't outright sexual and has now been changed). Obviously the rule can be tweaked and changed but the level of inappropriate avatars was becoming excessive. Regardless of where you're browsing the site from, no one needs to see hyper-sexualized avatars of shirtless men as well as women in bikinis just because they want to read some news on their favorite games. The rule is still up for discussion but I'd ask for people to be mature on the issue and discuss it in a civil manner.

All i'm saying is, be wary of how you word it. There's preventing the site from being oversexed, and then there's preventing cleavage

Unless i'm interpreting that improperly. For one, i would consider my current signature appropriate and make no plans on changing it, nor would i consider past utilized signatures, namely the following

to be inappropriate either. Discretion should play both ways



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

MontanaHatchet said:
amp316 said:
MontanaHatchet said:
To address the issue:

While I'm reluctant to compare the two sites so often, on NeoGAF signatures aren't even allowed and I can probably only think of one shirtless avatar that I remember from the site (which wasn't outright sexual and has now been changed). Obviously the rule can be tweaked and changed but the level of inappropriate avatars was becoming excessive. Regardless of where you're browsing the site from, no one needs to see hyper-sexualized avatars of shirtless men as well as women in bikinis just because they want to read some news on their favorite games. The rule is still up for discussion but I'd ask for people to be mature on the issue and discuss it in a civil manner.


I have a suggestion.  For people that it bothers maybe there should be an option to turn off the avatar pics.

This doesn't account for lurkers or people who are new to the site (not to mention one shouldn't have to block every avatar or specific ones just to avoid inappropriate ones).

True.  I don't know what to say then...

 



Proud member of the SONIC SUPPORT SQUAD

Tag "Sorry man. Someone pissed in my Wheaties."

"There are like ten games a year that sell over a million units."  High Voltage CEO -  Eric Nofsinger

chris212223 said:
room414 said:
crissindahouse said:
room414 said:
Neogaf and most respected forums seem to do alright with similar policy. I think vgchartz will manage somehow.

but whats with your pic? i think your pic is much more disturbing. people seeing that at work think i will plan my suicide at a suicid internet site or something like that^^


Make a thread and complain about it and see what happens...lol.

Is that Eric Draven!?


yes



                                
Around the Network
MontanaHatchet said:
amp316 said:
MontanaHatchet said:
To address the issue:

While I'm reluctant to compare the two sites so often, on NeoGAF signatures aren't even allowed and I can probably only think of one shirtless avatar that I remember from the site (which wasn't outright sexual and has now been changed). Obviously the rule can be tweaked and changed but the level of inappropriate avatars was becoming excessive. Regardless of where you're browsing the site from, no one needs to see hyper-sexualized avatars of shirtless men as well as women in bikinis just because they want to read some news on their favorite games. The rule is still up for discussion but I'd ask for people to be mature on the issue and discuss it in a civil manner.


I have a suggestion.  For people that it bothers maybe there should be an option to turn off the avatar pics.

This doesn't account for lurkers or people who are new to the site (not to mention one shouldn't have to block every avatar or specific ones just to avoid inappropriate ones).

That would be a good idea Amp but it requires editing the site. Why would they do that for the few people it bothers? Besides, the new site should be coming soon and who knows what that has to bring. I don't understand what is so bad with this. I didn't mind the avatars (except that one that Pezus uploaded. O_O) but how hard is it just to follow guidlines? It's not like they are moderating every single thing you do. It is a semi-good idea Amp but one that would take a waste of time.



Mr Khan said:
MontanaHatchet said:
To address the issue:

While I'm reluctant to compare the two sites so often, on NeoGAF signatures aren't even allowed and I can probably only think of one shirtless avatar that I remember from the site (which wasn't outright sexual and has now been changed). Obviously the rule can be tweaked and changed but the level of inappropriate avatars was becoming excessive. Regardless of where you're browsing the site from, no one needs to see hyper-sexualized avatars of shirtless men as well as women in bikinis just because they want to read some news on their favorite games. The rule is still up for discussion but I'd ask for people to be mature on the issue and discuss it in a civil manner.

All i'm saying is, be wary of how you word it. There's preventing the site from being oversexed, and then there's preventing cleavage

Unless i'm interpreting that improperly. For one, i would consider my current signature appropriate and make no plans on changing it, nor would i consider past utilized signatures, namely the following

to be inappropriate either. Discretion should play both ways


The mod team is currently debating the issue. I think cleavage is acceptable to some degree but I desire for it to be up to the discretion of the individual moderator. There's a pretty clear divide between small amounts of anime cleavage and the softcore porn avatars that have led to this change. For example I would find the pictures you posted acceptable, but not some of the lingerie/shirtless avatars that have become increasingly common on the site. 

I am perfectly open to discussing the issue with the community and I'm glad to see that people have been open with their feelings on the issue. We seek to make the site look more professional and to be an optimal viewing experience for everyone.



 

 

MontanaHatchet said:
To address the issue:

While I'm reluctant to compare the two sites so often, on NeoGAF signatures aren't even allowed and I can probably only think of one shirtless avatar that I remember from the site (which wasn't outright sexual and has now been changed). Obviously the rule can be tweaked and changed but the level of inappropriate avatars was becoming excessive. Regardless of where you're browsing the site from, no one needs to see hyper-sexualized avatars of shirtless men as well as women in bikinis just because they want to read some news on their favorite games. The rule is still up for discussion but I'd ask for people to be mature on the issue and discuss it in a civil manner.

you won't believe how many half naked i have to see only when i wish to check my e-mails on the front page of my e-mail sites.

i just wonder why everyone is comparing it now with neogaf an so on. i thought this is another site? i thought this is the site were you could always chose an own avatar without a problem? this is one of the reasons why i'm here, because i had some kind of freedom here and have a signature here and not in some other forums. ok, i didn't think that i will chose this site because of that as my forum but i think this is the reason why i stayed and not in other forums, because i liked the look of this forum. i mean, if every site would be the same why do we even need different forums? i think some other things are better there as well shouldn't we change that as well here to get a better site? why don't we all just go to neogaf now?



crissindahouse said:
MontanaHatchet said:
To address the issue:

While I'm reluctant to compare the two sites so often, on NeoGAF signatures aren't even allowed and I can probably only think of one shirtless avatar that I remember from the site (which wasn't outright sexual and has now been changed). Obviously the rule can be tweaked and changed but the level of inappropriate avatars was becoming excessive. Regardless of where you're browsing the site from, no one needs to see hyper-sexualized avatars of shirtless men as well as women in bikinis just because they want to read some news on their favorite games. The rule is still up for discussion but I'd ask for people to be mature on the issue and discuss it in a civil manner.

you won't believe how many half naked i have to see only when i wish to check my e-mails on the front page of my e-mail sites.

i just wonder why everyone is comparing it now with neogaf an so on. i thought this is another site? i thought this is the site were you could always chose an own avatar without a problem? this is one of the reasons why i'm here, because i had some kind of freedom here and have a signature here and not in some other forums. ok, i didn't think that i will chose this site because of that as my forum but i think this is the reason why i stayed and not in other forums, because i liked the look of this forum. i mean, if every site would be the same why do we even need different forums? i think some other things are better there as well shouldn't we change that as well here to get a better site? why don't we all just go to neogaf now?


I'm comparing it to NeoGAF to give a sense of the types of rules other forums have regarding avatars, not to say that Vgchartz has to be exactly likely NeoGAF.



 

 

room414 said:
crissindahouse said:
no i won't because i respect others and what they like to use as avatar...


you have to draw the line somewhere


did i say anything else? but if the line cuts a girl in bikini out of this website a guy who looks like a mass murder should be banned as well (i have nothing gainst your pic but i think it's worse than a bikini  girl) and if not, a girl in bikini looking like the girls i will see every freaking day in summer shouldn't be banned as well in my opinion. all that "here are kids" and "nsfw" is crazy for me because i don't think that i should forbid children now to walk along the street because they will see many girls in bikinis then in their gardens and this in not just a picture, this is for real then haha