The 'new' Swansont

[Elite Engineer]

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.

[Delta1212]

Is it possible to hijack one thread simply by posting an entirely different thread?

[zapatos]

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.

[iNow]

^that

[MigL]

What's up with all the female avatars ?

When did this forum become a 'transvestite' forum ?

[StringJunky]

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.

[MigL]

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.

[swansont]

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.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

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

[StringJunky]

 

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".

[michel123456]

 

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.

[StringJunky]

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.

[Strange]

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 )

[swansont]

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.

[StringJunky]

 

 

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.

[Raider5678]

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?

[CharonY]

For the longest time his avatar was actually Sean Connery as Bond. His current choice is much more recent.

[swansont]

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

[Phi for All]

I think The Ugly Duckling is appropriate for swansont:

 

 

Chicks dig sensitive physicists.

[CharonY]

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.

[StringJunky]

Avatars are a whimsy, that's all.

[MigL]

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 )

[Sirona]

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

[MigL]

What do you mean ?

Connery was the best looking James Bond, EVER !

[Sirona]

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.