Pictures of ourselves as avatars

[kk.]

Which is my point, you can't have a rule if it can't be moderated really. There's no real reason to have this rule. If people aren't confident with themselves, they won't use it. And if people don't like looking at other peoples avatars thn tough, there's an option to disable isn't there? I could have a really ugly avatar of a randomer, and people wouldn't like looking at that..

[Titch]

There is no definitive way of being able to tell who is who. The same way if a person decides to post a picture of themselves in papoy, there is no way we can tell if it is them. Indeed, there have been occasions where people have lied. That's inevitable.

so techincally i put pic of me in my av anyway and say its a famous person who does sumin ? as we r allowed "famous" people in our avs.

[xxMATTGxx]

so techincally i put pic of me in my av anyway and say its a famous person who does sumin ? as we r allowed "famous" people in our avs.

Then you would have to hand over the famous persons name and a quick google search can tell anyone if the person is famous or not.

[Titch]

Then you would have to hand over the famous persons name and a quick google search can tell anyone if the person is famous or not.

what does famous count as though, some1 who plays for england in a sport count?

[Mathew]

If this is allowed, please don't change your avatar, Titch. I'd crap myself everytime I read your posts.

[Catzsy]

In my view this would cause more trouble than it's worth. Some members would get teased and bullied just because they don't match the stereotype of what is 'conventionally' attractive. If they have a lack of confidence in posting their picture then they may well be accused of 'being fake'. I don't think anybody would benefit from it. As Oli and Garion have said there is a thread for posting pictures for those who want to and if it was introduced members might feel 'obliged'. Quite honestly what is attractive depends on what attracts you. I don't go for conventional handsome types and like big noses.

[Barmi]

In my view this would cause more trouble than it's worth. Some members would get teased and bullied just because they don't match the stereotype of what is 'conventionally' attractive. If they have a lack of confidence in posting their picture then they may well be accused of 'being fake'. I don't think anybody would benefit from it. As Oli and Garion have said there is a thread for posting pictures for those who want to and if it was introduced members might feel 'obliged'. Quite honestly what is attractive depends on what attracts you. I don't go for conventional handsome types and like big noses.

The insecure types are no more likely to put an image of themselves in their avatar than they are in the relevant thread. It's a ridiculous rule to enforce in practice, and it limits user choice.

Some of the arguments put forward by senior management in this thread have been impressively weak and unnecessarily conservative.

Edit: For the record I don't post pictures of myself on Habbo forums and have no intention of doing so, but that doesn't stop me from realising that the arguments against change are ridiculous.

Edit: Congratulations to whoever can't frame an unbiased poll. Of course most people here don't want to put a personal photo as an avatar... but you should be asking whether members would mind if other members did. Phrasing a poll the wrong way around to generate the response you want is a shambles.

[Richie]

In my view this would cause more trouble than it's worth. Some members would get teased and bullied just because they don't match the stereotype of what is 'conventionally' attractive. If they have a lack of confidence in posting their picture then they may well be accused of 'being fake'. I don't think anybody would benefit from it. As Oli and Garion have said there is a thread for posting pictures for those who want to and if it was introduced members might feel 'obliged'. Quite honestly what is attractive depends on what attracts you. I don't go for conventional handsome types and like big noses.

Jesus made the ban button for a reason. That's like saying "those who don't post in "post a picture" will be classed as being fake" What's the difference?


I'm not going to be putting a pic of me in my dp, but I still disagree with it being against the rules to put a pic of yourself in ur avatar. If I won the lotto tonight could I post a pic of me in my avatar? cos id be classed as "famous" once again could sumtin not be wisked up so ppl have a selection either to see avatars or not? kinda like the filter selection I was talking bout. Anything is possible, u just dnt know it yet.

[GommeInc]

Seems a bit of a dodgy rule to enforce. If people are likely to be bullied when an argument goes wrong, surely there's just as much chance of any sort of bullying anyway? People should be able to have themselves as their avatar (within reason) and if they get bullied, the bully will be taken care of as usual :/

[FlyingJesus]

Allow them, no reason not to. I might not want to see Emma Watson in an avatar/signature, i'll live though.

Why would you not want to look at Emma Watson

do people like looking at my avatar?

Jumped the gun a bit they haven't said you can do it yet ;|


Apart from aesthetics, I think the problem really would be controversies over "fake" people who put up pictures of people who aren't them claiming that they are. It's happened enough just with a "post a pic" thread, having it involved with every post a person makes would have a much bigger impact.

Then again, maybe that would be interesting for a day or two at least.