Does an avatar has big impact on how a person is perceived over the internet?

Yeah, for the wonderful nonsense we bring to good ol' SciForums. :)

Cheers
beerchug.gif


Presents for all
biggringift.gif
 
Yes, Firefly's right. I do so often get sidetracked.

cows go moo.

*slaps self* "Get yourself together, man!"

All right. I'm safe. :D

To the original question "Does an avatar have a big impact on how a person is perceived over the Internet?", I'm sitting on the fence on this one.

My "No" Argument:
I disagree with the statement simply because I myself don't make a "big deal" about people's avatars. Some are nice to look at, some are funny, and some suggest things (which I'm not about to delve into). :D Avatars are simply teeny little pictures, with interesting themes sometimes, and let's face it, I live in a country where freedom of speech is applauded. So I will not be one to judge what kind of a person he/she is, based on their avatars; I just accept that there are many individuals in this world, and I congratulate them on contributing an avatar as a small personal statement, saying "Here I am, look at me."

My "Yes" Argument:
I agree with the statement, because people choose avatars, not the other way around. If a person wants to be represented by a cartoon character or a symbol, then it should be taken into consideration that they have willingly chosen it. Therefore, their choice reflects a bit of their personality, because I don't think people would want to use something they didn't want themselves to be synonomous with. The question is "How big an impact". I don't know, maybe some people don't like System of a Down (in reference to my own avatar), so they pin me as a cult leader with bad taste in music, while other fans of SOAD will find my taste superb, therefore making me a candidate for friendship. There are approximately six billion people out there; who knows how big an impact one can make on others, just by presenting their thoughts in avatar-form?

:D
 
I posted such a long thread just to get to this page.

Anyway, I asked a question. Who won this years Stanley Cup?
 
Avatar represents smthing, but because I am an avatar I chose my photo as my avatar pic.
PRIVATE009-1.jpg
 
I once had an Avatar that was ripped from the cover of the UK recent Edition of "Neuromancer" by William Gibson.

Basically a guy with a blue colouring and glasses with a background of different future looking architectures merged across each other.

I found that having such an avatar gave the false illusion that I was that guy, So I donned a pair of glasses and juggled a webcam while trying to click a mouse and basically recreated the avatar in my own image.

(This means I haven't ripped my avatar, it's me... with hair at that time)


As for the whole Cool/Uncool business end of this thread, I suppose an avatar can distinguish a person, I know I've scanned long posts for avatars because their quicker than finding a name and I do associate them with the person that uses them.

The only uncool avatars are those that, are well used in an Overkill sense (By loads of people on different boards.
 
Last edited:
Hi Stryder, haven't talked to you in ages:(

btw- Neocron is the ultimate cyberpunk world...
just some glitches (beta4)
 
I don't buy into the notions that avatars are badges of elitism, conformity or individualism lost.

I think avatars are to the poster's written words as a person's face is to their spoken words: an unspoken, visual identifier rather than a caste tool.

Those who chose to use no avatar--like myself, until I read this thread--are just folks wearing sunglasses.

Face it. If there is a caste-sort of hierarchy at play with avatars, it is that few are great looking and perform their basic function with distinction and esprit.

C'est la vie.

:)
 
I have been using avatars for umm...5 years.

For me the making of the avatar is an expression of my mood/interests/creativity at the time of making it.

Stryder and Avatar have done the honourable thing and used their very own art...no hassles of ripping off someone elses work for them.

Whatever...I better answer the Q.
Yes, I think the representation of someone by their av does have some kinda impact on how someone is perceived...but not in a huge way. Just like a glimpse of their personality I guess.
But just remember...never judge a book by its cover.

p.s. I am not really a cat!
:bugeye:
 
Okay, here goes, off the top of my head.

Stanley Cup Winners;

2002 - Detroit Red Wings
2001 - Colorado Avalanche
2000 - New Jersey Devils
1999 - Dallas Stars
1998 - Detroit Red Wings
1997 - Detroit Red Wings
1996 - Colorado Avalanche
1995 - New Jersey Devils
1994 - New York Rangers
1993 - Montreal Canadiens
1992 - Pittsburgh Penguins
1991 - Pittsburgh Penguins
1990 - Edmonton Oilers
1989 - Calgary Flames
1988 - Edmonton Oilers
1987 - Edmonton Oilers
1986 - Montreal Canadiens
1985 - Edmonton Oilers
1984 - Edmonton Oilers
1983 - New York Islanders
1982 - New York Islanders
1981 - New York Islanders
1980 - New York Islanders
1979 - Montreal Canadiens
1978 - Montreal Canadiens
1977 - Montreal Canadiens
1976 - Montreal Canadiens
1975 - Philadelphia Flyers
1974 - Philadelphia Flyers
1973 - Montreal Canadiens
1972 - Boston Bruins
1971 - Montreal Canadiens
1970 - Boston Bruins
1969 - Montreal Canadiens
1968 - Montreal Canadiens
1967 - Toronto Maple Leafs
1966 - Montreal Canadiens
1965 - Montreal Canadiens
1964 - Toronto Maple Leafs
1963 - Toronto Maple Leafs
1962 - Toronto Maple Leafs
1961 - Toronto Maple Leafs
1960 - Montreal Canadiens
1959 - Montreal Canadiens
1958 - Montreal Canadiens
1957 - Montreal Canadiens
1956 - Montreal Canadiens
1955 - Detroit Red Wings

And that's as far back as I know!!!!
 
Stanley Cup thing...

I'm so bloody pissed off that the Leafs were so close, then lost!!!!!!!! Argh!! I'm sure that my fellow Torontonians will join me in this outburst of rage....which should have long been abated but still burns....

*kicks the wall in anger, then yelps in pain* :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top