The Avatar would have to be optional in signature campaigns?

[FullNode]

I am considering the possibility of applying to a signature campaign, I have not done it yet because almost all signature campaigns require changing the avatar for its image
The avatar is a personal image of each user, I believe that the decision to use the avatar field in a campaign should be optional, not mandatory
One of the drawbacks I see is when you are reading posts in long threads or in different sections, you have to pay close attention to the answer you are reading and look at the username to know who it is, if this user uses their own avatar you recognize it right away, your brain already has it memorized
If several users reply in the same thread with the same campaign on their avatar, then it becomes annoying to be constantly checking who the responding user is
Is there any possibility of solving it by the forum administration?

I only suggest that the user decide freely if they want to use their avatar or the signature image

[jackg]

Tbh even if it's given as a rule I think it's still mostly optional.

You could pm the relevant manager if you're not sure but I'd just go ahead and apply and see what happens but I don't really think they'll care either way...

[The Cryptovator]

The forum gives you the freedom to wear your avatar as you want. The forum can't fix which avatar will you wear? The problem is most companies have been asking for an avatar since they are aware of it. So even managers don't like to add it they have to do it as per company requirements. Some companies haven't been asking for an avatar like Chipmixer. So, if you do not like to wear company avatars then you have to seek for those campaign doesn't require for it. I don't think the admin can give you a solution. If the admin limit changes the avatar, then there will be problems if someone wants to update their avatars a second time.

[Smartvirus]

Those are the things your paid for and it's basically company policy for them. It helps the signature to be click bait to some extent. You, know, signature might not be that catchy to the viewers and so, some animated character might just change the whole story. Besides, it's basically an identity, you don't work for a company without some sort of identity card to identify you as a staff of theirs, either temporal or permanent.
Better enough, some companies allow you to design an avatar that connotes them but of your idea which sounds like a breath of fresh air should you not be okay with the regular once.

[LoyceV]

I believe that the decision to use the avatar field in a campaign should be optional, not mandatory

Joining a signature campaign is indeed optional
This has nothing to do with Meta, you should probably move (bottom-left) it to Service Discussion.

If several users reply in the same thread with the same campaign on their avatar

I'm still confused with my own posts sometimes

[Rikafip]

Is there any possibility of solving it by the forum administration?

I don't think that forum administration can/want do anything about it since wearing an avatar as a requirement for signature campaign is not breaking any forum rules, so they won't meddle in that. And they most likely won't make any changes in that regard.

I do agree with the other things you said, that all participants of some signature campaign having exactly the same avatar doesn't bring much extra exposure, and what's even worse in case 5-6 members of the same signature reply in same topic one after another it gives an appearance of one user writing all those messages so it has counter effect. At least that's how it looks to me. I've been active on various forums for many years and avatar was always an important part of forum member identity.

Then again I do understand companies wanting to get as much exposure as possible for their money so maybe it would be a good idea to find some middle ground. Something like BestChange, signature campaign I am currently part of did, so we can have customized avatars while their logo is still visible. From what I noticed, reactions to that innovation were positive so maybe after some time other signature campaigns consider doing similar thing.

[hilariousetc]

This isn't something the forum is going to require or enforce. Campaigns are just trying to get exposure for whatever they're promoting so most will require the avatar to get more bang for their buck but if it's part of their terms the only thing you can do is either not join that campaign or ask if you can be an exception. Most probably won't grant you the exception though as they're paying you to promote their product and if that includes the avatar then it's probably unfair to everyone else and if one person gets special treatment everyone else likely will want it too. There are campaigns that don't require them though like chipmixer but they're probably the exception.

I believe that the decision to use the avatar field in a campaign should be optional, not mandatory

Joining a signature campaign is indeed optional
This has nothing to do with Meta, you should probably move (bottom-left) it to Service Discussion.

It belongs in meta in my opinion as it looks like he's asking the forum admins to prohibit it or make a rule against it.

[DooMAD]

So we recently had a topic about requesting intervention to make avatar ads clickable and now people want intervention to make them optional.  Certainly a lot of interest in avatars lately.  I'm not a member of any other forums where the admins need to play "avatar police", so it all sounds a bit strange to me when people come up with these ideas here.  

What benefit would it bring to the forum?  If the answer is "None.  It would only benefit me" then it's probably safe to assume it's not going to be a priority for the staff here.

[decodx]

What benefit would it bring to the forum?  If the answer is "None.  It would only benefit me" then it's probably safe to assume it's not going to be a priority for the staff here.

We, all together, make a bitcointalk forum. The voice of the community should have an impact. Staff and admins cannot exist without us just as we cannot exist without them.

Maybe it would be a good idea to organize some kind of petition? If enough people agree with this idea, maybe the forum administrators will react and introduce some kind of rule or restriction for bounty campaign organizers.

[hilariousetc]

What benefit would it bring to the forum?  If the answer is "None.  It would only benefit me" then it's probably safe to assume it's not going to be a priority for the staff here.

We, all together, make a bitcointalk forum. The voice of the community should have an impact. Staff and admins cannot exist without us just as we cannot exist without them.

Maybe it would be a good idea to organize some kind of petition? If enough people agree with this idea, maybe the forum administrators will react and introduce some kind of rule or restriction for bounty campaign organizers.

Anyone is free to create a petition or poll, but even if the majority of users wanted it it wouldn't necessarily mean the admins will react to it or enforce it, though I'm sure they'd take it into consideration. This seems like something the staff aren't going to get involved with though and probably should be a free market decision really. If someone is dead set against wearing the avatar then they just shouldn't join that campaign. Some people are dead set against signature campaigns and therefor don't join them but you can't really have it both ways.

What benefit would it bring to the forum?  If the answer is "None.  It would only benefit me" then it's probably safe to assume it's not going to be a priority for the staff here.

Well, much like removing signatures it would make the forum look a bit cleaner and users would be more easily identifiable but there's nothing to stop one or more users having the same avatar anyway.

[LoyceV]

It belongs in meta in my opinion as it looks like he's asking the forum admins to prohibit it or make a rule against it.

In that case: What is it with people asking to take away freedoms all the time? This forum gives freedom, enjoy it! There are millions of websites out there that don't give you freedom, don't try to turn Bitcointalk into that direction. Please!

Maybe it would be a good idea to organize some kind of petition? If enough people agree with this idea, maybe the forum administrators will react and introduce some kind of rule or restriction for bounty campaign organizers.

Here you go.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

The avatar is a personal image of each user, I believe that the decision to use the avatar field in a campaign should be optional, not mandatory

You're entitled to your opinion, but I wouldn't keep your expectations high with regard to campaigns not wanting to rent out your avatar space.  It's kind of prime digital real estate for advertising, which is why most campaigns require you to use an avatar that they designed.

Personally, I hate avatars and have them on ignore so I don't have to see them--and that's not specific to bitcointalk; I've always thought they waste space (along with the signature) and make for more scrolling. 

But in any case, if you're going to join a campaign you've got to abide by their rules.  I don't keep track of what campaigns are currently running, or how many there are, but I expect that the majority of them will require you to display their avatar.  Some of them even require putting a message in your personal message space.  But hey, good luck and I hope you find a campaign that won't require your avatar to be changed.  And please, for the love of all that's evil, don't be a shitposter.

[qwertyup23]

I only suggest that the user decide freely if they want to use their avatar or the signature image

In my honest opinion, this falls upon the discretion of the campaign manager but I doubt that such request may be granted.

If I were a businessman and I hired a campaign manager to advertise my business in the forum, I would mandatorily require wearing of avatars as a precondition to join the campaign due to more exposure. Though signatures give exposure already (relative to the rank of the user), seeing someone with an avatar has the impact of associating and remembering my business quickly.

[mk4]

The avatar is a personal image of each user,

It should somewhat be the same with your signature space, right? Since you pretty much display both information fields every time you post or create a topic.

The solution here is pretty simple: don't join signature campaigns that requires you to change your avatar if your avatar is THAT important to you. The same way that you wouldn't apply for a job that's located in a city or street that you don't want to work in.

[FIFA worldcup]

I am considering the possibility of applying to a signature campaign, I have not done it yet because almost all signature campaigns require changing the avatar for its image
The avatar is a personal image of each user, I believe that the decision to use the avatar field in a campaign should be optional, not mandatory
One of the drawbacks I see is when you are reading posts in long threads or in different sections, you have to pay close attention to the answer you are reading and look at the username to know who it is, if this user uses their own avatar you recognize it right away, your brain already has it memorized
If several users reply in the same thread with the same campaign on their avatar, then it becomes annoying to be constantly checking who the responding user is
Is there any possibility of solving it by the forum administration?

I only suggest that the user decide freely if they want to use their avatar or the signature image

The Signature is also a personal space of the user and if you can rent the Signature space you can rent the avatar space too. If you do not want to include the image of the company in your avatar space, you can simply not join the campaigns where wearing avatar is mandatory. There are many campaigns where wearing avatar is optional and few gives few extra bucks for wearing the avatar.

[decodx]

Maybe it would be a good idea to organize some kind of petition? If enough people agree with this idea, maybe the forum administrators will react and introduce some kind of rule or restriction for bounty campaign organizers.

Here you go.

I see that you find voicing people's opinions to be a kind of mockery or folly. It's nice to be part of a privileged minority, isn't it?

[actmyname]

I see that you find voicing people's opinions to be a kind of mockery or folly. It's nice to be part of a privileged minority, isn't it?

I would like you to create a way to implement a petition that is not prone to Sybil attacks or centralization, without the use of any analog-based verification.

If the forum followed a democratic pursuit in regard to rule-making then you would see it fall to the ground. How many accounts do you think would allow for the proliferation of increasingly shady scams?

[decodx]

If the forum followed a democratic pursuit in regard to rule-making then you would see it fall to the ground. How many accounts do you think would allow for the proliferation of increasingly shady scams?

I understand you and I agree with you to some extent. I'm not suggesting that central authority is inherently a negative thing for this community. However, it would also be nice to have a transparent procedure on some topics.

As far as I can understand, the whole concept of decentralized currency and blockchain technology is based on that principle, right?

[pugman]

I don't think this is that big of an issue in comparison to the ones that currently persist, and I get the point of why do I have to change my avatar when it is a "signature campaign". But if you want money, you gotta listen to what advertisers want. This isn't a forum related issue. This is more of a you and me, the general community's problem.

Give it a day or two, change your avatar if you really wanna go for a signature campaign. People will recognize you regardless because of your name and post quality, not by your avatar. Avatar just gives a feeling like: "Oh I know this guy, he has a really cool avatar!" or, "This avatar reminds me of a dumb joke I was laughing at 3 months ago at 7:39 AM in the morning huehuehue".

[NavI_027]

One of the drawbacks I see is when you are reading posts in long threads or in different sections, you have to pay close attention to the answer you are reading and look at the username to know who it is, if this user uses their own avatar you recognize it right away, your brain already has it memorized

If only if such user only use one image for his avatar constantly. But how about those members who are spontaneous and change their avatar like the way they change their dp in their social medias ? How can you recognized them instantly?

My point is, looking on one's name is still the best way to recognize a member.

I only suggest that the user decide freely if they want to use their avatar or the signature image

Of course you are free, all of us are free to do so. But if it violates the rules of the campaign then better to avoid doing so unless you are willing to lose payment lol.