On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Michael Snoyman <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:michael@snoyman.com">michael@snoyman.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div><div></div><div class="h5">On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Magnus Therning <<a href="mailto:magnus@therning.org">magnus@therning.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 13:14, John Lato <<a href="mailto:jwlato@gmail.com">jwlato@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>> From: Michael Snoyman <<a href="mailto:michael@snoyman.com">michael@snoyman.com</a>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Also, now 10 random profiles will be displayed on the homepage. Only<br>
>>> "verified users" will be displayed here. I'm also considering adding a<br>
>>> new status as well: real picture, so that only people with real images<br>
>>> (not cartoons, not identicons) can show up on the homepage. I think<br>
>>> this might give a more professional feel. Thoughts?<br>
>><br>
>> I agree that it would be nice to use only real pictures, however I wouldn't<br>
>> want to leave out those who choose not to use any image at all.<br>
>> What about a site policy that user images must be real pictures (if they<br>
>> exist), and violations can be flagged/blocked? Although, I don't know how<br>
>> this would interact with using OpenID, which appears to be most of the users<br>
>> currently displaying an identicon.<br>
><br>
> I think it would be wrong to have <a href="http://haskellers.com" target="_blank">haskellers.com</a> impose restrictions<br>
> on what image I put on gravatar. My image on gravatar pops up in<br>
> numerous other sites (I believe stackoverflow, ohloh, flickr, etc) and<br>
> I'm not necessarily happy with putting my photo everywhere, even<br>
> though I'd be fine with putting it on <a href="http://haskellers.com" target="_blank">haskellers.com</a>.<br>
><br>
> So, instead I'd like to see the use of gravatar become optional. Then<br>
> if <a href="http://haskellers.org" target="_blank">haskellers.org</a> could require a photo, and I could simply choose not<br>
> to get my cartoon image from gravatar.<br>
><br>
> An obvious extension would be to allow me to get the image from other<br>
> sources in the future, maybe an option to grab a picture out of an<br>
> album on Facebook, or Flickr?<br>
<br>
</div></div>So firstly, just to clarify, I was never recommending we make real<br>
photos a requirement to have an account on Haskellers. I was simply<br>
talking about the 10 random profiles that get shown on the homepage: I<br>
think it gives a more professional feel to the site if we see 10 "real<br>
people" and not Bart Simpson. That was my question.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I generally agree on this point, however having a profile on the homepage (even if it is randomly selected) provides a great deal of publicity and legitimacy to that profile (as much as <a href="http://haskellers.com">haskellers.com</a> can provide!). I think this should be equally available to users who for whatever reason do not wish to share a photo image.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<br>
Now, the idea of using something besides gravatar is a fair point. I<br>
know personally I *like* it when sites use gravatar, as it's one less<br>
site I have to upload my image to. Otherwise, I need to search around<br>
for my preferred profile image, crop it to whatever that site wants,<br>
hope they'll scale it nicely, etc. From the site maintainer<br>
standpoint, gravatar also means there's less moving parts on<br>
Haskellers, and it decreases our bandwidth significantly, which is<br>
definitely something to consider.<br>
<br>
I'll definitely put some thought into providing an alternative to<br>
gravatar. In the meanwhile, an option you have is to add a second<br>
gravatar email address. This works especially well with Gmail<br>
accounts, where you can just use a + sign (eg,<br>
<a href="mailto:michael%2Bhaskellers@snoyman.com">michael+haskellers@snoyman.com</a>). I'm not saying this is ideal, but if<br>
you want to have your real photo up, it will work today.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>That seems to be reasonable. Although this is only an issue if there's some sort of real-image restriction to the functionality of <a href="http://haskellers.com">haskellers.com</a>. I don't think the implementation should be difficult once the policy is decided.</div>
<div><br></div><div>John</div></div>