Elite Engineer Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 Stupid thread. Again. Dear OP: Just stop. Seriously and please. Appreciate the poised, calm, cool responses, though. Some here truly leading by example. I haven't said a word. Uh, OP was about something else entirely. I am not entirely sure whether it is a properly hijack, as it still kind of revolves around swansong. But then, what doesn't? It was towards what "appeared" to be the men on the forum flocking to a female...no hijack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 Is it possible to hijack one thread simply by posting an entirely different thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zapatos Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 I honestly don't understand what it is about me that offends some of you so.As far as I can tell you don't offend anyone here. A single person got a little twisted due to what appears to be a bit of a weakness of his own; you were just the person who brought his weakness to light. Everything since has been poking fun at his assertion, not at you. The idea that people can benefit from their physical attributes (height, looks, hair, etc.) is not surprising and would probably make a pretty interesting thread. What I found annoying about this whole thing was the assumption that your positive reputation was due simply to your physical attributes and not the content and style of your posts, and that I (and people like me) only gave you positive rep because I am overwhelmed by testosterone. If majority feel that I've somehow brought about unpleasantness, then I will gladly leave.The majority are quite happy to have you here. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 ^that 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted April 2, 2016 Author Share Posted April 2, 2016 What's up with all the female avatars ? When did this forum become a 'transvestite' forum ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 What's up with all the female avatars ? When did this forum become a 'transvestite' forum ? Do you have an issue with transvestites? The whole discussion was about assessing people on their avatars... it shouldn't matter, but it does to some. Avatars reveal something about the poster, which may not align with their physical/visible attributes. Swansont, for instance, could just happen to like Jessica Rabbit and have nothing to do with him as a person.... that's OK. I liked having that Daphne Blake avatar for itself, but took it off because it was just an experiment and this is getting old now... my motive had a shelf-life. Also I did it to make a point, and don't need it anymore. I shall do it again, in some different way, but it will be because I want to. If it makes me a transvestite, or whatever, so be it... I don't believe any person is all man or all woman, anyway. All you can really say about an avatar is that the poster likes it, in some way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted April 2, 2016 Author Share Posted April 2, 2016 And I'm just poking fun by taking it to an extreme. Seems to me, if people would 'lighten up' a little we wouldn't need to have this discussion to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 my motive had a shelf-life. As have mine, but I'm lazy and besides, I don't pay all that much attention to avatars. Even if the avatar is a picture of a person, you don't know for sure if it's a picture of the person who made the account. On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Smith Cosmos Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 As have mine, but I'm lazy and besides, I don't pay all that much attention to avatars. Even if the avatar is a picture of a person, you don't know for sure if it's a picture of the person who made the account. On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.. Unless the person is truthful ,of course. Then it is WYSIWYG. WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET Submitted by Gerald 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 As have mine, but I'm lazy and besides, I don't pay all that much attention to avatars. Even if the avatar is a picture of a person, you don't know for sure if it's a picture of the person who made the account. On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog. Absolutely, I visualise a poster derived from what, and how, they post, not a picture. My avatars are just flavours of the moment... they don't mean anything. Real likeness photos are different, some like to be open about who they are and that's fine. I just think "It is what it is". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michel123456 Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 As have mine, but I'm lazy and besides, I don't pay all that much attention to avatars. Even if the avatar is a picture of a person, you don't know for sure if it's a picture of the person who made the account. On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog. Right. I made mistakes about that. But what puzzles me also is that the avatar changes even in old threads. It is like transforming the past, I find that weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Right. I made mistakes about that. But what puzzles me also is that the avatar changes even in old threads. It is like transforming the past, I find that weird. The forum programmers hadn't thought of that, I would imagine, and just made it global. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 But what puzzles me also is that the avatar changes even in old threads. It is like transforming the past, I find that weird. This is because the pages are created dynamically. There isn't a website with thousands of pages of endless discussions. The pages are only created when someone looks at them. (Which might be a deep analogy for quantum mechanics ) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 The forum programmers hadn't thought of that, I would imagine, and just made it global. Or they did, because what if you are a new member and you see posts with different avatars from the same person. It might cause confusion. Even more so, if you did this with user names. Then you couldn't make the connection to past posts. Also probably easier to program if you don't have to have keep track of the extra data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Or they did, because what if you are a new member and you see posts with different avatars from the same person. It might cause confusion. Even more so, if you did this with user names. Then you couldn't make the connection to past posts. Also probably easier to program if you don't have to have keep track of the extra data. I think you're right, on reflection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raider5678 Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 I will probably go back eventually. But we were battling caricatures of evil geniuses, so it felt more like Powers than Bond. I for one can't seem to take him seriously as a cartoon woman. I first saw swansont as austin powers and that was the first image that I associated with him. Now every time I see the picture I have to look at the name to confirm to myself that this is swansont, not somebody else. So looking at this a year later, who likes the new avatar he has now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 For the longest time his avatar was actually Sean Connery as Bond. His current choice is much more recent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 For the longest time his avatar was actually Sean Connery as Bond. His current choice is much more recent.Before that I was a knight who said, "Ni!" I may have been Arthur for a stretch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 I think The Ugly Duckling is appropriate for swansont: Chicks dig sensitive physicists. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 Before that I was a knight who said, "Ni!" I may have been Arthur for a stretch I think I vaguely recall that one. Or it is a false memory, considering how long it has been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 Avatars are a whimsy, that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted April 13, 2016 Author Share Posted April 13, 2016 Welcome 'back' Stringy. Now if only Swansont would go back to James Bond. ( and I'm not too thrilled with Pepe Le Phew either, Phi ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirona Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 (edited) Welcome 'back' Stringy. I'm embarrassed to say I thought String's avatar was some sort of oil on canvas biblical painting. I really should wear my glasses when online. Although, without my glasses, Connery might start to look good too. Edited April 13, 2016 by Sirona Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted April 13, 2016 Author Share Posted April 13, 2016 What do you mean ? Connery was the best looking James Bond, EVER ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirona Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 What do you mean ? Connery was the best looking James Bond, EVER ! Pierce Brosnan may have been the worst Bond, but he was definitely the most handsome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now