, i'm all in favor for it, and also it should not increase the spam, because it is included in the sig campaign, so 1 post for the sig will count for the avatar too, no one will post more just for the avatar 
Topic: Do you like to see an Avatar Campaign? [POLL] - page 3. (Read 3161 times)
absolutely yes, more easy money , i'm all in favor for it, and also it should not increase the spam, because it is included in the sig campaign, so 1 post for the sig will count for the avatar too, no one will post more just for the avatar
, i'm all in favor for it, and also it should not increase the spam, because it is included in the sig campaign, so 1 post for the sig will count for the avatar too, no one will post more just for the avatar 
What happened to the poll 
I am pretty sure it had some 20 votes or so..
Edit: Did I do something stupid?? Weird.
I am pretty sure it had some 20 votes or so..
Edit: Did I do something stupid?? Weird.
You add a new one and it resetted.
lol. Anyway. Those who had voted, but doesn't show as voted now, please do vote again
Sorry for any inconvenience caused.
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 509
I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!
What happened to the poll
I am pretty sure it had some 20 votes or so..
Edit: Did I do something stupid?? Weird.
I am pretty sure it had some 20 votes or so..
Edit: Did I do something stupid?? Weird.
You add a new one and it resetted.
Well my point is that people are unlikely to block signatures because signatures are often very useful. However if too many people have the same advertisement on their avatar then people will start to disable avatars.
Avatars can be useful too, but if people are annoyed by signatures or avatars they'll probably just block them anyway.
The reason that avatars are useful is because it helps identify people. If people start advertising with their avatar then that benefit goes away.
But they're also useful as an advertising medium. They won't really care about people being more difficult to recognise but that's the compromise. Many wont want to sell their avatar because of this but many also will for the extra coin.
It is easy to measure how many people see a billboard or a TV advert as you can measure how many people pass a certain location or view a tv show. It is much more difficult to measure how many people see a certain user''s avatar which makes it difficult to price how much an avatar is worth
You can say the same here with the number of hits the forum gets - after all that's why signatures are so valuable here from an advertisers standpoint - but like TV adverts or billboards viewing figures or views are often wildly inaccurate and are estimates and as such don't always translate into sales or people even actually paying attention to them. As with any advertising you're just buying the time and space and hoping it gets you sales or at the very least gets your brand out there.
With signatures you can track how many people click on the link which will give you a general idea as to how many people have seen the signature. Forum impressions will only tell you how many people visit the forum as a whole and will not tell you how many people have seen the avatar of the specific people who are advertising for you.
Hits don't necessarily translate into sales or money though so it's also about brand awareness which an avatar will help considerably.
What happened to the poll
I am pretty sure it had some 20 votes or so..
Edit: Did I do something stupid?? Weird.
I am pretty sure it had some 20 votes or so..
Edit: Did I do something stupid?? Weird.
Well my point is that people are unlikely to block signatures because signatures are often very useful. However if too many people have the same advertisement on their avatar then people will start to disable avatars.
Avatars can be useful too, but if people are annoyed by signatures or avatars they'll probably just block them anyway.
It is easy to measure how many people see a billboard or a TV advert as you can measure how many people pass a certain location or view a tv show. It is much more difficult to measure how many people see a certain user''s avatar which makes it difficult to price how much an avatar is worth
You can say the same here with the number of hits the forum gets - after all that's why signatures are so valuable here from an advertisers standpoint - but like TV adverts or billboards viewing figures or views are often wildly inaccurate and are estimates and as such don't always translate into sales or people even actually paying attention to them. As with any advertising you're just buying the time and space and hoping it gets you sales or at the very least gets your brand out there.
Well my point is that people are unlikely to block signatures because signatures are often very useful. However if too many people have the same advertisement on their avatar then people will start to disable avatars.
Avatars can be useful too, but if people are annoyed by signatures or avatars they'll probably just block them anyway.
It is easy to measure how many people see a billboard or a TV advert as you can measure how many people pass a certain location or view a tv show. It is much more difficult to measure how many people see a certain user''s avatar which makes it difficult to price how much an avatar is worth
You can say the same here with the number of hits the forum gets - after all that's why signatures are so valuable here from an advertisers standpoint - but like TV adverts or billboards viewing figures or views are often wildly inaccurate and are estimates and as such don't always translate into sales or people even actually paying attention to them. As with any advertising you're just buying the time and space and hoping it gets you sales or at the very least gets your brand out there.
There is a huge difference if you would ask me. Signatures often contain useful information and further references for such a service, while on the other hand, avatars contain only an image which is solely used for representing a brand/service. With this links and texts, a user can already know what the service/product is all about, thus making things easier on the user's side. Signatures imo is a better advertisement for a product/service than an avatar.
I'm not doubting it's better but an image can also contain much info and is very valuable imo. As I've said before it's essentially a mini billboard and you can utilise the PT and weblink to direct people to your website as well.
Well the thing about signatures is that they very often contain very useful information so it is unlikely that many people will disable signatures outright. It is more likely that people will come up with things like grue's ad block that blocks only certain signatures they do not want to see.
Avatars don't really have any use other then to identify certain people. If people started selling their avatar space then people would likely start to disable them which defeats the point of having an avatar campaign in the first place.
Also the price for avatars is likely to be low because they are not clickable so all it can really do is build brand recognition.
Avatars don't really have any use other then to identify certain people. If people started selling their avatar space then people would likely start to disable them which defeats the point of having an avatar campaign in the first place.
Also the price for avatars is likely to be low because they are not clickable so all it can really do is build brand recognition.
I don't think there's that much difference between signatures and avatars to be honest and you can make most arguments against avatars for signatures too. As I've mentioned before billboards or TV adverts aren't clickable either but they have a purpose. An avatar can be like a tiny billboard or advert and you could also utilise the Personal Text and weblink beneath for extra effectiveness it if you wish.
There is a huge difference if you would ask me. Signatures often contain useful information and further references for such a service, while on the other hand, avatars contain only an image which is solely used for representing a brand/service. With this links and texts, a user can already know what the service/product is all about, thus making things easier on the user's side. Signatures imo is a better advertisement for a product/service than an avatar.
Well the thing about signatures is that they very often contain very useful information so it is unlikely that many people will disable signatures outright. It is more likely that people will come up with things like grue's ad block that blocks only certain signatures they do not want to see.
Avatars don't really have any use other then to identify certain people. If people started selling their avatar space then people would likely start to disable them which defeats the point of having an avatar campaign in the first place.
Also the price for avatars is likely to be low because they are not clickable so all it can really do is build brand recognition.
Avatars don't really have any use other then to identify certain people. If people started selling their avatar space then people would likely start to disable them which defeats the point of having an avatar campaign in the first place.
Also the price for avatars is likely to be low because they are not clickable so all it can really do is build brand recognition.
I don't think there's that much difference between signatures and avatars to be honest and you can make most arguments against avatars for signatures too. As I've mentioned before billboards or TV adverts aren't clickable either but they have a purpose. An avatar can be like a tiny billboard or advert and you could also utilise the Personal Text and weblink beneath for extra effectiveness it if you wish.
It is easy to measure how many people see a billboard or a TV advert as you can measure how many people pass a certain location or view a tv show. It is much more difficult to measure how many people see a certain user''s avatar which makes it difficult to price how much an avatar is worth
Well the thing about signatures is that they very often contain very useful information so it is unlikely that many people will disable signatures outright. It is more likely that people will come up with things like grue's ad block that blocks only certain signatures they do not want to see.
Avatars don't really have any use other then to identify certain people. If people started selling their avatar space then people would likely start to disable them which defeats the point of having an avatar campaign in the first place.
Also the price for avatars is likely to be low because they are not clickable so all it can really do is build brand recognition.
Avatars don't really have any use other then to identify certain people. If people started selling their avatar space then people would likely start to disable them which defeats the point of having an avatar campaign in the first place.
Also the price for avatars is likely to be low because they are not clickable so all it can really do is build brand recognition.
I don't think there's that much difference between signatures and avatars to be honest and you can make most arguments against avatars for signatures too. As I've mentioned before billboards or TV adverts aren't clickable either but they have a purpose. An avatar can be like a tiny billboard or advert and you could also utilise the Personal Text and weblink beneath for extra effectiveness it if you wish.
Well the thing about signatures is that they very often contain very useful information so it is unlikely that many people will disable signatures outright. It is more likely that people will come up with things like grue's ad block that blocks only certain signatures they do not want to see.
Avatars don't really have any use other then to identify certain people. If people started selling their avatar space then people would likely start to disable them which defeats the point of having an avatar campaign in the first place.
Also the price for avatars is likely to be low because they are not clickable so all it can really do is build brand recognition.
Avatars don't really have any use other then to identify certain people. If people started selling their avatar space then people would likely start to disable them which defeats the point of having an avatar campaign in the first place.
Also the price for avatars is likely to be low because they are not clickable so all it can really do is build brand recognition.
Unless it's bad, avatar campaigns wouldn't hurt the forum, so... Why not?
Yeah. why not?
Unless it's bad, avatar campaigns wouldn't hurt the forum, so... Why not?
Anyone can disable avatar right ?
Well this forum ..gonna not be same again just like early years
Well this forum ..gonna not be same again just like early years
How is it any different than disabling sigs? If someone disables avatars or sigs it doesn't effect how you see the forum.
Yes you are right but as I said previously there will not be a problem if the "promotional ad" go to the left or right side of the avatar. Everyone will keep his personal avatar and no one will be wrong to identify the user (remember there is always the username).
Having an additional image advert edited onto the avatar won't be very effective from an advertisers point of view nor do I think it will become popular. I just think marco wanted to keep his current avatar as that's the one he was known by whilst promoting Bit-x. Maybe he will change it in the future though.
I chose to add Bit-X to the side to keep my known avatar for other members to easily recognise me.
As for if I started an avatar campaign: I'd think of other ways than having every member wear the same avatar. That would be plain annoying, boring and people would get confused. Currently, the best option is something like mine.
This might solve the problems on seeing the same avatar on threads. It may also be a means of recognizing who the user is by just looking at the avatar that is retained and is beside an avatar that might be a logo or something. Given that the px size for an avatar is too small, I suggest that the campaign managers should determine first the size of the avatar they want to use, or how large they would like the avatar to appear.
As for if I started an avatar campaign: I'd think of other ways than having every member wear the same avatar. That would be plain annoying, boring and people would get confused. Currently, the best option is something like mine.
Well that certainly would be more preferable and would probably be the best solution. Can't see many other campaigns doing it but maybe its the best way to do it if you have to utilise avatars at all.
It has its limits too.
1. What will someone who already has an image that takes up the full rectangular space?
2. What if the person doesn't know to add it both? I use MS Paint all the time, but I can still do it.
Still it may not be very good looking.
3. It will spoil the real avatar lol.
4. Payouts will be low. So it won't be worth it.
All the trouble of editing it, everytime someone changes campaign, leaves from campaign, .... And the avatar isin't updated instantly too..
global moderator
Activity: 3990
Merit: 2717
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
As for if I started an avatar campaign: I'd think of other ways than having every member wear the same avatar. That would be plain annoying, boring and people would get confused. Currently, the best option is something like mine.
Well that certainly would be more preferable and would probably be the best solution. Can't see many other campaigns doing it but maybe its the best way to do it if you have to utilise avatars at all.
Anyone can disable avatar right ?
Well this forum ..gonna not be same again just like early years
Well this forum ..gonna not be same again just like early years
How is it any different than disabling sigs? If someone disables avatars or sigs it doesn't effect how you see the forum.
Yes you are right but as I said previously there will not be a problem if the "promotional ad" go to the left or right side of the avatar. Everyone will keep his personal avatar and no one will be wrong to identify the user (remember there is always the username).
Having an additional image advert edited onto the avatar won't be very effective from an advertisers point of view nor do I think it will become popular. I just think marco wanted to keep his current avatar as that's the one he was known by whilst promoting Bit-x. Maybe he will change it in the future though.
I chose to add Bit-X to the side to keep my known avatar for other members to easily recognise me.
As for if I started an avatar campaign: I'd think of other ways than having every member wear the same avatar. That would be plain annoying, boring and people would get confused. Currently, the best option is something like mine.
I don't see any problem with avatar campaigns, personally I think it energises topics, when you're looking at posts
I don't mind...
I just don't feel special bcuz i don't have one...
But Avatar Campaigns are great for the community, people can have a source of income... If i could i "might" join an avatar campaign.
I just don't feel special bcuz i don't have one...
But Avatar Campaigns are great for the community, people can have a source of income... If i could i "might" join an avatar campaign.
At current rates, you could earn some 30 times the rate from a signature.
I don't mind...
I just don't feel special bcuz i don't have one...
But Avatar Campaigns are great for the community, people can have a source of income... If i could i "might" join an avatar campaign.
I just don't feel special bcuz i don't have one...
But Avatar Campaigns are great for the community, people can have a source of income... If i could i "might" join an avatar campaign.
Jump to: