News:

There is also the shroud of turin, which verifies Jesus in a new way than other evidences.

Main Menu

The future of the forum

Started by Claireliontamer, June 14, 2016, 12:03:52 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Firebird

Quote from: Ali on June 22, 2016, 02:16:52 AM
I didn't read properly and missed that it was the word "dick." Then I zoomed in really close and stuck my face all close to my phone looking for the dick. I don't know what this adds to the conversation, but stop promising dick and not delivering.  ;D

Maybe he meant it metaphorically. As in,  "I promise you dick", so really you shouldn't be surprised you found nothing  ;D
"Great, replace one book about an abusive, needy asshole with another." - Will (moderator) on replacing hotel Bibles with "Fifty Shades of Grey"

Ali

Quote from: Firebird on June 22, 2016, 03:49:53 AM
Quote from: Ali on June 22, 2016, 02:16:52 AM
I didn't read properly and missed that it was the word "dick." Then I zoomed in really close and stuck my face all close to my phone looking for the dick. I don't know what this adds to the conversation, but stop promising dick and not delivering.  ;D

Maybe he meant it metaphorically. As in,  "I promise you dick", so really you shouldn't be surprised you found nothing  ;D
Haha hahahahaha ha.

Magdalena

Quote from: Ali on June 22, 2016, 02:10:39 AM
I'm sorry I started the .gif thing again, Mags. I genuinely wasn't trying to complain about .gifs, I thought I was being a little cheeky and funny, but as sometimes happens, when I think I'm giving someone an affectionate poke in the ribs, I may be blacking their eyes instead. I apologize.
My dear, Ali, don't apologize!  :smileshake: :hug:  ;)

"I've had several "spiritual" or numinous experiences over the years, but never felt that they were the product of anything but the workings of my own mind in reaction to the universe." ~Recusant

Magdalena

Quote from: Jimmy on June 21, 2016, 11:56:31 PM
Quote from: Magdalena on June 21, 2016, 11:24:24 PM

Hello, Jimmy, I don't think we've met. It's nice to meet you.  :)
I think I figured out I was a hippie AFTER I realized I was an atheist, by the time I figured it out, it was too late, I was addicted to this place, I couldn't leave....but now.  :sad sigh: I don't know, I don't like this gif-ers persecution.  >:( Six...yes! Six years fighting "the man" about it! I AM TIRED!  >:(

Nice to meet you too!   :hug: 

Hi!
Ooh! A hugger!  :hug:
:grin:

"I've had several "spiritual" or numinous experiences over the years, but never felt that they were the product of anything but the workings of my own mind in reaction to the universe." ~Recusant

Magdalena

Quote from: Asmodean on June 22, 2016, 12:21:40 AM



I forgot to mention...
Very nice use of a GIF, Asmo.
You're giving me the "feel" of..."A Mafia "Representative."
I never would've guess that "feeling" behind the words you wrote. I appreciate your honesty.

Professor Fancy Pants, can I apply to the "Witness Protection Program?" --Like, right now?  :shifty:

"I've had several "spiritual" or numinous experiences over the years, but never felt that they were the product of anything but the workings of my own mind in reaction to the universe." ~Recusant

Magdalena

Quote from: xSilverPhinx on June 21, 2016, 11:21:40 PM
Quote from: Bad Penny II on June 21, 2016, 10:59:16 AM
Probably one in science as well,,,,

Hmm... :thoughtful:

QuoteDo we have a consensus on the .gif issue?  No?
Well never mind the bothersome dialogue, I'll unilaterally declare one.
Some people like .gifs and they are free to post them, preferably in their quarantine zone.
Other members, aesthetes and lumps don't like .gifs and are free to complain about them.
I don't like Gifs but I do enjoy whingeing about them, it doesn't compensate entirely for the assault to my senses, yet it is a small recompense.  And no I don't think anti .gif posts should be quarantined, a dedicated denunciation thread in the philosophy section would be appropriate though.

It's not a gif invasion, they're basically (mostly  :P) restricted to their threads.

Quote from: Magdalena on June 21, 2016, 09:53:27 PM
There's no need to do this, anymore. I'll just take my shit somewhere else.
Our mission statement begins with: "...It is our goal to help dissolve negative stereotypes currently held towards atheists and facilitate productive dialogue with those of differing viewpoints..." and it ends with something like this: "...The complete freedom to simply be the person you want to be..." I just don't feel that, right now, here.

I've been lurking the "hippie" forums. Maybe it's time I join my kind.

I started another gif thread, this time in the Science section, because some things are better as gifs.  ;)

You're very welcome to post there! :grin:

That's nice, xSilverPhinx, but I'm sure Bad Penny II is very passionate about this, and he will resort to the cuneiform translations of Hammurabi's Code—if necessary. He will find something there and use it to send, us—the peasants—back to the quarantine zone, from where we never should've escaped.  >:(

"I've had several "spiritual" or numinous experiences over the years, but never felt that they were the product of anything but the workings of my own mind in reaction to the universe." ~Recusant

Tank

Quote from: Magdalena on June 21, 2016, 09:53:27 PM
Quote from: Bad Penny II on June 21, 2016, 10:59:16 AM
Do we have a consensus on the .gif issue?  No?
Well never mind the bothersome dialogue, I'll unilaterally declare one.
Some people like .gifs and they are free to post them, preferably in their quarantine zone.
Other members, aesthetes and lumps don't like .gifs and are free to complain about them.
I don't like Gifs but I do enjoy whingeing about them, it doesn't compensate entirely for the assault to my senses, yet it is a small recompense.  And no I don't think anti .gif posts should be quarantined, a dedicated denunciation thread in the philosophy section would be appropriate though.  Probably one in science as well,,,, probably a thread in all the sections, they're just so wrong in so many ways.

Social issue: I think they are a gateway to gateway drugs,
Science: myopia is a growing problem - gifs
Philosophy: .gifism is a particularly ugly bastard child of hedonism and the stoic, combining the worst of both.   Followers eschew natural colour music and self movement whilst embracing a pitifully diminished pallet, simpleton captioning and repetition, and repetition and repetition and it is a waste, such a waste.
A .jpg with millions of colours is so frugal with its bytes, the wastrel .gifest won't appreciate it though.
.png is a virtuous thing, the stationary .gif an anachronism, a shim at best.
Perhaps rehabilitation is possible but that would be for more patient souls than mine.
There's no need to do this, anymore. I'll just take my shit somewhere else.
Our mission statement begins with: "...It is our goal to help dissolve negative stereotypes currently held towards atheists and facilitate productive dialogue with those of differing viewpoints..." and it ends with something like this: "...The complete freedom to simply be the person you want to be..." I just don't feel that, right now, here.

I've been lurking the "hippie" forums. Maybe it's time I join my kind.
Mags. BPII is joking. And if he isn't he's a grumpy old fart and should be treated as such. I love your .gifs. But they do have a technical impact on some users. So please do not take BPIIs comments seriously. Nobody else does  :lol:
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

Magdalena

Quote from: Tank on June 22, 2016, 06:56:43 AM
Quote from: Magdalena on June 21, 2016, 09:53:27 PM
Quote from: Bad Penny II on June 21, 2016, 10:59:16 AM
Do we have a consensus on the .gif issue?  No?
Well never mind the bothersome dialogue, I'll unilaterally declare one.
Some people like .gifs and they are free to post them, preferably in their quarantine zone.
Other members, aesthetes and lumps don't like .gifs and are free to complain about them.
I don't like Gifs but I do enjoy whingeing about them, it doesn't compensate entirely for the assault to my senses, yet it is a small recompense.  And no I don't think anti .gif posts should be quarantined, a dedicated denunciation thread in the philosophy section would be appropriate though.  Probably one in science as well,,,, probably a thread in all the sections, they're just so wrong in so many ways.

Social issue: I think they are a gateway to gateway drugs,
Science: myopia is a growing problem - gifs
Philosophy: .gifism is a particularly ugly bastard child of hedonism and the stoic, combining the worst of both.   Followers eschew natural colour music and self movement whilst embracing a pitifully diminished pallet, simpleton captioning and repetition, and repetition and repetition and it is a waste, such a waste.
A .jpg with millions of colours is so frugal with its bytes, the wastrel .gifest won't appreciate it though.
.png is a virtuous thing, the stationary .gif an anachronism, a shim at best.
Perhaps rehabilitation is possible but that would be for more patient souls than mine.
There's no need to do this, anymore. I'll just take my shit somewhere else.
Our mission statement begins with: "...It is our goal to help dissolve negative stereotypes currently held towards atheists and facilitate productive dialogue with those of differing viewpoints..." and it ends with something like this: "...The complete freedom to simply be the person you want to be..." I just don't feel that, right now, here.

I've been lurking the "hippie" forums. Maybe it's time I join my kind.
Mags. BPII is joking. And if he isn't he's a grumpy old fart and should be treated as such. I love your .gifs. But they do have a technical impact on some users. So please do not take BPIIs comments seriously. Nobody else does  :lol:
:lol:
I didn't know this.

Well, in case you haven't noticed, I have a  :airquotes: thing :airquotes: for grumpy old farts, like BPII, Siz, and grumpy young men, like Asmo and Crow:snicker:


I take into considerations their comments. It matters a lot to me. They're also crazy people and someone needs to hear what they have to say, just like they take the time to "talk" to this crazy one, right here.  :computerwave:

I just don't know what to do with this gif topic, anymore.  :shrug:


:secrets1: I don't know, Tank. Maybe this whole thing, for me, it's about Crow leaving.

I'm sorry, everyone.  :(

Has anyone talked to him?

"I've had several "spiritual" or numinous experiences over the years, but never felt that they were the product of anything but the workings of my own mind in reaction to the universe." ~Recusant

Asmodean

#83
Quote from: Magdalena on June 22, 2016, 02:08:59 AM
What the hell are you talking about, Asmo?
Am I being unclear?

Quote
Everyone here knows you're grumpy and no one has a problem with that! ---I don't mean No one, I mean, no one!
While like pretty much everyone else I do care about the others' opinion of me, ultimately, their problem with me is their problem. If they have one, they are welcome to raise it. I will respond as constructively as I am able and, if I agree with their point, alter my behaviour accordingly.

Quote from: Asmodean
It's not the size that matters!
When is that ever true? The number of pixels is relevant as it determines the amount of screen space used.

Quote
No one is looking at how many "pixels" it takes to say something, we are looking at the "feeling" behind the image.
I defer to my example. Whatever the "feeling" behind that .gif may be, its sentiment could have been said just as well without it.

Quote
Yes, you posted a photo of a nasty VW-bus, it said more than you ever could about that time, my point..."a picture is worth a thousand words." And what's wrong with that? Maybe the gif is irrelevant to the conversation, but only to some, not to all.
When ten words are called for, one thousand is nine hundred and ninety too many. (For an example, think politics. I won't go into detail unless it's less obvious than I percieve.) It has to be said that in a discussion setting, pictures rarely produce quite so many words and the saying is pretty much bullshit case-by-case, although it becomes somewhat more profound in the larger scheme of things.

When it comes to relevance, in the context of a dialogue, it's not a fully subjective construct.

Quote
Maybe it requires an explanation from your side to understand how gifs becomes a problem when it comes to "computer stuff" that most of us don't understand.
.gif is a compressed graphics format. It's irrelevant outside the context of computer stuff. As such, any and all problems with .gifs relate to computers.

Quote
I understand it creates a problem to those with slow internet, but that's not my problem
Not really. .gifs are of tiny file size compared to their frame size.

Quote
it was for a while when I had dial-up internet, but I didn't resort to "aiding the audience's understanding," to solve it. I simply got faster internet, problem solved.
Aiding the audience's understanding is something you do to avoid miscommunitcation and misunderstanding, not to download torrents faster. For instance, if we were discussing centripetal force and I wanted to illustrate my point, I could use an image or two to do that:



This one makes it easier to visualise the direction of the force in question, thus "aiding my audience's understanding" of the point being made.

Quote
...Also, I don't want to debate you.
I don't want to see you cry.  >:(
I have a relatively high threshold for emotional distress due to external stimuli. If that is indeed what's stopping you, bring it on. I'll be OK. And even if I'm not, you won't see it.

Quote from: Firebird on June 22, 2016, 03:49:53 AM
Quote from: Ali on June 22, 2016, 02:16:52 AM
I didn't read properly and missed that it was the word "dick." Then I zoomed in really close and stuck my face all close to my phone looking for the dick. I don't know what this adds to the conversation, but stop promising dick and not delivering.  ;D

Maybe he meant it metaphorically. As in,  "I promise you dick", so really you shouldn't be surprised you found nothing  ;D
Ha!  ;D

...I meant exactly what I wrote, but... Ha.  ;D

Quote from: Ali on June 22, 2016, 02:10:39 AM
I'm sorry I started the .gif thing again, Mags. I genuinely wasn't trying to complain about .gifs, I thought I was being a little cheeky and funny, but as sometimes happens, when I think I'm giving someone an affectionate poke in the ribs, I may be blacking their eyes instead. I apologize.
Me, I think it's good. Apparently, it's a resurrected issue, but I can't seem to remember having joined the fray the last time(s).

EDIT: Merged responses.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 25, 2013, 08:18:52 PM
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

Magdalena

Excuse me!
:computerwave:
May I please be allowed to rant?
Thank you. :)

This is what we've said, so far:
1.   Some people are not interested in the atheist/religious debates, they're tired of them. They just want to talk to other people without someone "blessing" them; "praying" for them, or telling them "God loves them, or that "they're going to burn in hell—forever."

2.   The .gifs.

3.   The way we treat each other, and where this place is going.

I don't have anything to add to #1.

I want to talk about #2--.gifs.
Some see them as destructive to the serious nature of the argument. They make a "mess" and make it difficult to follow the threads. —Well, I don't agree with this. The. gifs lead to the discussion being dropped or derailed.—I also don't see this as a problem, because eventually we go back to the topic. The .gifs are disruptive—videos are not? What the... :eyebrow:?  Others think posting .gifs are a gateway to drugs. —I don't think this is true, some started waaayyyy before the gifs. And some enjoy the science .gifs.

".Gifs have a technical impact on some users." --I still don't know what this means. "A .gif is a compressed graphics format. It's irrelevant outside the context of computer stuff. As such, any and all problems with .gifs relate to computers." —This is good to know, I thought it was due to internet speed. ".gif is of tiny file size compared to their frame size." —I don't know what this means either, so it will not make me stop posting them. Asmo said, "Aiding the audience's understanding is something you do to avoid miscommunication and misunderstanding, not to download torrents faster. For instance, if we were discussing centripetal force and I wanted to illustrate my point, I could use an image or two to do that..."—Yeah, in His realm!...I'm sure a serious discussion about centripedal force would definitely need an illustration.  :eyeroll:

In my realm, however, some of us want to know how someone feels about something, why someone feels that way, and even if you don't want to know, we will tell people how we feel—Yes, with a .gif! I know, feelings, well...they "bother" some people. We also use .gifs to help the audience understand something, to avoid miscommunication and misunderstandings. —But then, again, sometimes .gifs do that—They "download torrents of emotions, and fast." In my realm, that's good. Some of us like reaction .gifs: sad, scared, serious, shocked, sigh, etc., because sometimes a smiley is not enough.  :smileshake:

Look, I wouldn't go to a "serious forum filled with intellectuals" and post a dancing hippie .gif. Well, maybe I would, but I'm sure they would ban me, and fast. This is a more relaxed forum that's why I do what I do with the .gifs. —If people hate my style, well, I'm sure it will be appreciated somewhere else.
This is what I'm talking about:
hackenslash posted: New Blog Post: Has Evolution Been Proven? In the Creationism/Intelligent Design area. I think 6 or 7 people commented on that post, and it has had over 800 views, so far--I don't know why. It's a funny, silly post. I don't think some of you enjoy silly things in serious topics and that's fine. I just like to make new people feel welcomed. If I wouldn't have said anything in that post, hackenslash might have felt a little bit, ignored? Maybe—I don't know? I don't know shit about what he said in his post, but we had a nice conversation with .gifs, and music videos, and other things. Look at Nam. No one wanted to play with him, because according to him, "He didn't play well with others." I played with him, until he got mad at me. I wanted to understand what made him mad, but he didn't get a chance to defend himself. Pahu, our dear crazy Pahu, he doesn't talk at all, but I tried talking with him also. Apathy, we met through our common love for .gifs.  :hug:

That's about .gifs, now, about #3: The way we treat each other and where this place is going.
Like Claire, I also think this place is cliquey and that can be intimidating to new members. When I came here, Asmo, Tank, OldGit and BCE were nice to me, and talked to me. I learned from them how to make people feel welcomed.  :secrets1:--I like Asmo, even if we disagree on things. He has unique way of communicating, and I like it.

I keep talking about Crow because him leaving us is the reason Claire started this thread. He made this place what it is—good or bad—and we just let him go. Someone said, "Our community might be tighter knit than those of other larger forums." If that's the case, how come only Claire and I have emailed him? Are these "fake" relationships? We come here every day, talk to each other, we get to know each other, and when someone says he/she is not happy here, do we listen? Or do we say, if you don't like it leave? I think Crow tried to tell us things, and we weren't listening.

Some are good at dividing and subtracting. Others are good at adding and multiplying. We've had a good balance of both that's why this place has lasted 10 years. Both are important, like salt and sugar. Too much sugar complicates your diabetes and too much salt complicates your hypertension. Let's try to keep it balanced so that everyone can be happy.

I haven't posted any .gifs, so far, it has been difficult, and I'm not happy, but sometimes we have to do things we don't like to make sure relationships last. And just look at how much I've had to write when I could've just said all this with maybe just 3 .gifs! >:( >:( >:(
I also appreciate the effort Asmo made by posting two of them!  ;D

:grin: I'm gonna go for a few day, so I will probably not respond to comments.
I don't think I have anything else to say. :scratch:

"I've had several "spiritual" or numinous experiences over the years, but never felt that they were the product of anything but the workings of my own mind in reaction to the universe." ~Recusant

Tom62

I think that HAF is a nice cozy place for atheists and the occasional non-atheist. It is a bit conservative, in a sense that we like to keep the way things are and don't really appreciate members who "Rock the Boat". There i nothing against it, but it makes HAF perhaps a bit boring. Sure, there are the occasional interesting discussions, but our most active threads are limited to just a few and are most likely not very interesting for attracting new members (like "Ban the poster above you", "Games of Thrones",  the GIF warning thread, etc.). I don't want to sound pessimistic, because we have wonderful members at HAF ("No One" included). HAF will somehow survive, but might need some minor changes to remain popular (if we want that, of course ;)).
The universe never did make sense; I suspect it was built on government contract.
Robert A. Heinlein

Asmodean

#86
Quote from: Magdalena on June 23, 2016, 03:54:35 AM
The. gifs lead to the discussion being dropped or derailed.—I also don't see this as a problem, because eventually we go back to the topic.
Not speaking for any one else here, but I have dropped a discussion or two or just never entered into them due to the excessive use of images.

Quote
".gif is of tiny file size compared to their frame size." —I don't know what this means either, so it will not make me stop posting them.
This means that if you compare the on-screen size of a .gif (Its number og pixels) to its file size (The number of bytes), .gif yields a smaller file compared to, say, .jpeg.

In layman's terms, you can put more .gifs on a USB memory stick than you can .jpegs (can sometimes be different for multi-frame, or animated .gifs), .gifs generally load faster too, but suffer from degraded image quality.

Quote
In my realm, however, some of us want to know how someone feels about something, why someone feels that way, and even if you don't want to know, we will tell people how we feel—Yes, with a .gif!
I'm back to my point of it requiring an explanation being a sign that it fails at the intended task. How am I supposed to know how you feel from an out-of-context cutout of some B-actor, whos lips are often not moving in a way required to say whatever it says in the subtitles?

Some .gifs are just emoticons of varying sizes, like this one:

In proper context, they are OK, if a bit large and blinky-flashy. They rarely convey the actual state of the speaker's fight or flight reflex though, and as such, I can't see how they describe their feelings more accurately than words along the lines of "Gah! I'm outa here!"

Quote
I know, feelings, well...they "bother" some people. We also use .gifs to help the audience understand something, to avoid miscommunication and misunderstandings. —But then, again, sometimes .gifs do that—They "download torrents of emotions, and fast." In my realm, that's good. Some of us like reaction .gifs: sad, scared, serious, shocked, sigh, etc., because sometimes a smiley is not enough.  :smileshake:
My problem with those is that, as stated above, they fail to convey the poster's emotional state accurately more times than not.

Quote
Look, I wouldn't go to a "serious forum filled with intellectuals" and post a dancing hippie .gif. Well, maybe I would, but I'm sure they would ban me, and fast. This is a more relaxed forum that's why I do what I do with the .gifs. —If people hate my style, well, I'm sure it will be appreciated somewhere else.
Why not just take the "If they hate my style - fuck 'em" stance? Legislating taste, so to speak, even my own, is a concept I, for one, oppose. That doesn't mean, however, that any-one's style should be above reproach.

Quote
That's about .gifs, now, about #3: The way we treat each other and where this place is going.
Like Claire, I also think this place is cliquey and that can be intimidating to new members. When I came here, Asmo, Tank, OldGit and BCE were nice to me, and talked to me. I learned from them how to make people feel welcomed.  :secrets1:--I like Asmo, even if we disagree on things. He has unique way of communicating, and I like it.
Also, He's an equal opportunity Asmo. He's Asmo-ish to everyone He meets.

Quote
I keep talking about Crow because him leaving us is the reason Claire started this thread. He made this place what it is—good or bad—and we just let him go. Someone said, "Our community might be tighter knit than those of other larger forums." If that's the case, how come only Claire and I have emailed him? Are these "fake" relationships? We come here every day, talk to each other, we get to know each other, and when someone says he/she is not happy here, do we listen? Or do we say, if you don't like it leave? I think Crow tried to tell us things, and we weren't listening.
Well... If someone tells me they are done with me, I will respect that and stop trying to make contact. That does not mean that the relationship we had was fake or meant little, just that your freedom to walk away is not contingent on my agreeing with that decision or understanding it. (Yes, I'm a very easy person to break up with; there is no drama, just a wish of luck and a goodbye.)

Listening to people is important, and we don't suck at that in my honest opinion... However, acting, or at least considering action based on the information obtained... That, I think is an area in which we lack a certain something.

Quote
Some are good at dividing and subtracting. Others are good at adding and multiplying. We've had a good balance of both that's why this place has lasted 10 years. Both are important, like salt and sugar. Too much sugar complicates your diabetes and too much salt complicates your hypertension. Let's try to keep it balanced so that everyone can be happy.
Quoted for sensibility.

Quote
I haven't posted any .gifs, so far, it has been difficult, and I'm not happy, but sometimes we have to do things we don't like to make sure relationships last.
I must admit, that's a bit of a foreign concept to me. Making sure the relationships last, that is. Life is dynamic. Things change. People come and go. Sometimes we are sad to see them leave, saometimes happy. Other times still, we just don't care. That's... Life.

Quote
And just look at how much I've had to write when I could've just said all this with maybe just 3 .gifs! >:( >:( >:(
I also appreciate the effort Asmo made by posting two of them!  ;D
Well, if you did say it in three .gifs, we would not have had this conversation because I would not have understood what you wanted to say.

Quote from: Tom62 on June 23, 2016, 06:11:03 AM
I think that HAF is a nice cozy place for atheists and the occasional non-atheist. It is a bit conservative, in a sense that we like to keep the way things are and don't really appreciate members who "Rock the Boat". There i nothing against it, but it makes HAF perhaps a bit boring. Sure, there are the occasional interesting discussions, but our most active threads are limited to just a few and are most likely not very interesting for attracting new members (like "Ban the poster above you", "Games of Thrones",  the GIF warning thread, etc.). I don't want to sound pessimistic, because we have wonderful members at HAF ("No One" included). HAF will somehow survive, but might need some minor changes to remain popular (if we want that, of course ;)).
I agree.

When it comes to topics of conversation, I'm not a very good thread starter, but I do see a lack of threads I would normally take the time to respond constructively to. For example, I like quantum physics. One thing that fascinates me there above others is the "geometry" of elementary particles. Can they be seen as waves relating to the function of spacetime? In which case, when we split an electron into orbitons, holons and spinons, are we "just" looking at the different parts of its waveform? Or are the hypothesized strings they are supposedly made from something else?

Other things I like include highly controversial topics, such as should abortion be mandated for low-income parents with a fetus showing signs of severe disability, and somewhat esoteric topics like global politics and moral philosophy. I mention these just to illustrate that I fully understand why my kind of topics are rare and far between. They are difficult, they give people emotional ulcers and sometimes, they are very boring to the uninitiated.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 25, 2013, 08:18:52 PM
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

Davin

Quote from: Asmodean on June 23, 2016, 10:01:47 AM
Quote from: Magdalena on June 23, 2016, 03:54:35 AM
The. gifs lead to the discussion being dropped or derailed.—I also don't see this as a problem, because eventually we go back to the topic.
Not speaking for any one else here, but I have dropped a discussion or two or just never entered into them due to the excessive use of images.
Can't say I really care about that.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
".gif is of tiny file size compared to their frame size." —I don't know what this means either, so it will not make me stop posting them.
This means that if you compare the on-screen size of a .gif (Its number og pixels) to its file size (The number of bytes), .gif yields a smaller file compared to, say, .jpeg.

In layman's terms, you can put more .gifs on a USB memory stick than you can .jpegs (can sometimes be different for multi-frame, or animated .gifs), .gifs generally load faster too, but suffer from degraded image quality.
This is not correct. At least it's more likely to not be correct than correct. If we were to look at a one frame .gif and compare that to a .jpg of the same size, then usually, a gif could be smaller (depending on the color depth of the .jpg and the level of compression), but let's look at these two images:



The .gif is 8.08 MB while the .jpg is 95.1 KB (at least they were before I uploaded them). This means, that I could put 80 of these .jpg's for every .gif. I.E.: I can fit more .jpg's on a USB memory stick than I can .gifs.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
In my realm, however, some of us want to know how someone feels about something, why someone feels that way, and even if you don't want to know, we will tell people how we feel—Yes, with a .gif!
I'm back to my point of it requiring an explanation being a sign that it fails at the intended task. How am I supposed to know how you feel from an out-of-context cutout of some B-actor, whos lips are often not moving in a way required to say whatever it says in the subtitles?

Some .gifs are just emoticons of varying sizes, like this one:

In proper context, they are OK, if a bit large and blinky-flashy. They rarely convey the actual state of the speaker's fight or flight reflex though, and as such, I can't see how they describe their feelings more accurately than words along the lines of "Gah! I'm outa here!"
I've noticed several times where you've missed the points of jokes in the jokes thread, I can't be sure if you were serious, being pedantic, or just stirring up shit, but I also have the example you gave of James Gandolfini in his role as Tony Soprano, and you acted like it meant far less than the image implied. There is a context with the .gif that is built up by more than just an animated guy with text on the image.

For instance, I could type out, "I am not to be messed with and I will defend myself if you really want to take up an issue, but it won't be a polite exchange because I will be volatile, violent, and vitriolic when I feel like I am being disrespected. I'm upset that you would even imply something like what you just said, so you better tread lightly or drop it immediately..." Which doesn't even convey all the meaning in the .gif, I just don't want to spend a bunch of time typing out what can more easily be said in an animated image. Or I could just post a .gif.

Given the choice, I would post the .gif, while I assume that you wouldn't. I think either is fine. Apparently you don't think either is fine, and so you keep expressing that you don't like .gifs except in specific and limited contexts and usages. And that is fine too, but it's wrong to say that what a .gif says can just as easily be said in a brief amount of text. Sure, some sentiments expressed in .gifs. can be expressed in a short sentence, but I think those cases are rarer.

Text is just text and tone and emotions are not accurately conveyed, this is a widely known problem with text communication. But some of the unspoken visual cues that can be expressed in .gifs, which don't fix the entire problem, but can help to clarify tone and emotion.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
I know, feelings, well...they "bother" some people. We also use .gifs to help the audience understand something, to avoid miscommunication and misunderstandings. —But then, again, sometimes .gifs do that—They "download torrents of emotions, and fast." In my realm, that's good. Some of us like reaction .gifs: sad, scared, serious, shocked, sigh, etc., because sometimes a smiley is not enough.  :smileshake:
My problem with those is that, as stated above, they fail to convey the poster's emotional state accurately more times than not.
I disagree a lot with that. You're failure to interpret what is being expressed is not the same thing as the .gif failing to convey the poster's emotional state. Have you considered that maybe you don't understand what is being conveyed rather that it not conveying it? If you ask me about each one of the .gifs I've used, I could explain each one to you. I know at least some people that have no problem understanding what is being conveyed. Maybe it's just a language you don't understand.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
And just look at how much I've had to write when I could've just said all this with maybe just 3 .gifs! >:( >:( >:(
I also appreciate the effort Asmo made by posting two of them!  ;D
Well, if you did say it in three .gifs, we would not have had this conversation because I would not have understood what you wanted to say.
I would have understood it.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Asmodean

Quote from: Davin on June 23, 2016, 03:21:36 PM
Can't say I really care about that.
We are in agreement there.

Quote
This is not correct. At least it's more likely to not be correct than correct. If we were to look at a one frame .gif and compare that to a .jpg of the same size, then usually, a gif could be smaller (depending on the color depth of the .jpg and the level of compression), but let's look at these two images:
<Pics/>

The .gif is 8.08 MB while the .jpg is 95.1 KB (at least they were before I uploaded them). This means, that I could put 80 of these .jpg's for every .gif. I.E.: I can fit more .jpg's on a USB memory stick than I can .gifs.
I did say "multi-frame" there somewhere, did I not?

Quote
I've noticed several times where you've missed the points of jokes in the jokes thread, I can't be sure if you were serious, being pedantic, or just stirring up shit, but I also have the example you gave of James Gandolfini in his role as Tony Soprano, and you acted like it meant far less than the image implied.
The image does not imply much, especially to someone who first needs to ask "James who in the role as what?"

Quote
...Which doesn't even convey all the meaning in the .gif, I just don't want to spend a bunch of time typing out what can more easily be said in an animated image. Or I could just post a .gif.
I'm not saying that your point is invalid, but I don't see how it takes precedence over my point about a thousand words often being nine hundred and ninety more than needed. Why would you over-interprete some animated image like that?

Quote
Given the choice, I would post the .gif, while I assume that you wouldn't. I think either is fine. Apparently you don't think either is fine, and so you keep expressing that you don't like .gifs except in specific and limited contexts and usages. And that is fine too, but it's wrong to say that what a .gif says can just as easily be said in a brief amount of text. Sure, some sentiments expressed in .gifs. can be expressed in a short sentence, but I think those cases are rarer.
I do, in fact, think that expressing oneself through words or art or blinking your eyes in morse code is fine. What I am against, in a dialogue setting, is leaving more room for interpretation in your expression than absolutely necessary. Clarity has a high stock price in my portfolio, and I do try to be consistent in explaining or expanding the points I've conceyed too poorly to be understood. That can go both ways though; overstating is just as bad as understating.

Quote
Text is just text and tone and emotions are not accurately conveyed, this is a widely known problem with text communication. But some of the unspoken visual cues that can be expressed in .gifs, which don't fix the entire problem, but can help to clarify tone and emotion.
Unspoken visual cues..? In a long-distance message based delayed-response dialogue? Sure... Why not?

Quote
I disagree a lot with that. You're failure to interpret what is being expressed is not the same thing as the .gif failing to convey the poster's emotional state. Have you considered that maybe you don't understand what is being conveyed rather that it not conveying it? If you ask me about each one of the .gifs I've used, I could explain each one to you. I know at least some people that have no problem understanding what is being conveyed. Maybe it's just a language you don't understand.
No, me being a failure is not the same as a .gif being a failure. I'm a far more complex entity than it.

My not understanding what is being conveyed was actually made into a broader-context point, at least twice; if it requires an explanation, it fails at its intended task. The same is true of words, just not as often in my experience.

Quote
I would have understood it.
Would you, though? I'm tempted to make my next response in images to get this thing accuracy-measured.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 25, 2013, 08:18:52 PM
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

Davin

Quote from: Asmodean on June 23, 2016, 05:22:47 PM
Quote
This is not correct. At least it's more likely to not be correct than correct. If we were to look at a one frame .gif and compare that to a .jpg of the same size, then usually, a gif could be smaller (depending on the color depth of the .jpg and the level of compression), but let's look at these two images:
<Pics/>

The .gif is 8.08 MB while the .jpg is 95.1 KB (at least they were before I uploaded them). This means, that I could put 80 of these .jpg's for every .gif. I.E.: I can fit more .jpg's on a USB memory stick than I can .gifs.
I did say "multi-frame" there somewhere, did I not?
But it's still not often correct. In fact, it's nearly almost always the opposite of the way you presented it.

Quote from: Asmodean on June 23, 2016, 10:01:47 AMIn layman's terms, you can put more .gifs on a USB memory stick than you can .jpegs (can sometimes be different for multi-frame, or animated .gifs), .gifs generally load faster too, but suffer from degraded image quality.
The same image saved as .jpg is the 95.1 KB files size, but as a .gif it's 133 KB. So even in single frame files, with normal .jpg compression settings, .jps are almost always smaller than gifs at the same frame size. It's also not just sometimes different with multiframe .jpgs or .gifs. It's not really a big deal, but it is bad information to perpetuate.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
I've noticed several times where you've missed the points of jokes in the jokes thread, I can't be sure if you were serious, being pedantic, or just stirring up shit, but I also have the example you gave of James Gandolfini in his role as Tony Soprano, and you acted like it meant far less than the image implied.
The image does not imply much, especially to someone who first needs to ask "James who in the role as what?"
True, to someone who doesn't get it, it doesn't really offer much information. Just like if you tried talking to me French, but I wouldn't go around saying that speaking French doesn't really mean anything because I don't understand it.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
...Which doesn't even convey all the meaning in the .gif, I just don't want to spend a bunch of time typing out what can more easily be said in an animated image. Or I could just post a .gif.
I'm not saying that your point is invalid, but I don't see how it takes precedence over my point about a thousand words often being nine hundred and ninety more than needed. Why would you over-interprete some animated image like that?
I wouldn't consider it "over-interpreting" the animated image if it serves to convey to me what they meant by its usage.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
Given the choice, I would post the .gif, while I assume that you wouldn't. I think either is fine. Apparently you don't think either is fine, and so you keep expressing that you don't like .gifs except in specific and limited contexts and usages. And that is fine too, but it's wrong to say that what a .gif says can just as easily be said in a brief amount of text. Sure, some sentiments expressed in .gifs. can be expressed in a short sentence, but I think those cases are rarer.
I do, in fact, think that expressing oneself through words or art or blinking your eyes in morse code is fine. What I am against, in a dialogue setting, is leaving more room for interpretation in your expression than absolutely necessary. Clarity has a high stock price in my portfolio, and I do try to be consistent in explaining or expanding the points I've conceyed too poorly to be understood. That can go both ways though; overstating is just as bad as understating.
Yes, good communication takes both sides, and there is no magic bullet. The point I'm trying to make, is to stop trying to berate or brow beat those that choose to communicate in a way that you don't really like just because you don't like it. If you don't understand the usages of the animated .gifs, that's fine, I also don't understand a lot of things, that's a problem with communication in general, not just in the topic at hand.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
Text is just text and tone and emotions are not accurately conveyed, this is a widely known problem with text communication. But some of the unspoken visual cues that can be expressed in .gifs, which don't fix the entire problem, but can help to clarify tone and emotion.
Unspoken visual cues..? In a long-distance message based delayed-response dialogue? Sure... Why not?
Yep.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
I disagree a lot with that. You're failure to interpret what is being expressed is not the same thing as the .gif failing to convey the poster's emotional state. Have you considered that maybe you don't understand what is being conveyed rather that it not conveying it? If you ask me about each one of the .gifs I've used, I could explain each one to you. I know at least some people that have no problem understanding what is being conveyed. Maybe it's just a language you don't understand.
No, me being a failure is not the same as a .gif being a failure. I'm a far more complex entity than it.

My not understanding what is being conveyed was actually made into a broader-context point, at least twice; if it requires an explanation, it fails at its intended task. The same is true of words, just not as often in my experience.
I get it, it's not something that you understand. The point I'm trying to make is that just because you don't understand it, it doesn't mean that is doesn't mean something. You keep expressing that just because you personally do not understand something, that it's the failure of the thing and don't seem to consider that the failure could be on your end. Again, if people are speaking in French, I don't go around telling them their preferred form of communication is useless because I don't speak French.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
I would have understood it.
Would you, though? I'm tempted to make my next response in images to get this thing accuracy-measured.
But you don't seem to be good at it. I would and do understand Mags' usages. You can't just go and pick some random images and pretend like that's the same thing that we are doing. Because it's not what we are doing (at least not all the time).

I get it, some of the users here really don't like animated .gifs. That's great for them. I've cut back on my animated .gif usage and even often post in the properly quarantined area. I'm not going to stop completely or only post in the quarantined area, but I will keep my usages limited and try my best to respect other people's preferences while still expressing myself as I feel is best. See? In this discussion I've only posted images as examples and kept to your expressed communication preferences.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.