The Casual Vacancy
discussion
Do you hate the use of GIFs?
I support the feature, but I can't support it being requested to be one of the top priorities. There are a thousands continuity and site stability things that should come first, but yes the ability to block images should be available for users that want it.And also, it would be impossible to specify that you only want to block the animated images, they are added in exactly the same way so that wouldn't be feasible. It's either block all images, or none. Even that would be a huge undertaking technically for the site.
Stefani wrote: "I support the feature, but I can't support it being requested to be one of the top priorities. There are a thousands continuity and site stability things that should come first, but yes the abilit..."Well, I am going to ask for it anyhow and even though you don't support it being a top priority, I am going to ask that it be made a top priority (what GR staff then does with the request is up to them). The fact is that there are users on this website who have medical issues that are or can be made worse by animated images, especially ones with flashing lights and repetitions makes this request more than just a simple wish.
Stefani wrote: "I support the feature, but I can't support it being requested to be one of the top priorities. There are a thousands continuity and site stability things that should come first, but yes the abilit..."Perhaps if members were more conscious of how GIFs and large images can affect other members. Simply liking a friend's status update will throw that *like* onto the feeds and be seen by non-friends, some very inappropriate sexually. I've seen some friends starting off reviews with a GIF warning, plus there's also the spoiler tag, one would have to click to see the image.
Misfit wrote: "Stefani wrote: "I support the feature, but I can't support it being requested to be one of the top priorities. There are a thousands continuity and site stability things that should come first, bu..."And if there is someone who consistently like things or makes updates that put things that annoy me into my feed...I unfriend that person so it's no longer in my feed. No one is forcing you to have these things in your feed or continue to read reviews that have them. Why should every user have to consider changing the way they use GR because a few people are annoyed by it.
I support having a feature to block images, but even if it's put into the pipeline it ain't happening for months at best, use other options if it's so annoying. I don't particularly like the book page for this book either...so I don't go to it because I know there is material there I don't wish to see. Simple and taking responsibility for my own actions and use of the site.
"Why should every user have to consider changing the way they use GR because a few people are annoyed by it?"1. Because that's how society works
2. Couldn't both sides say this equally? There are a lot of us who used GR as a GIF-free site for years.
The point of this thread seems to be that there is a community issue that people are trying to solve by finding a mutually-equitable solution.
So far the solution seems to be a user-specified toggle. (Which, I repeat, is ADA-standard, just like wheelchair ramps.)
Katherine wrote: ""Why should every user have to consider changing the way they use GR because a few people are annoyed by it?"1. Because that's how society works
2. Couldn't both sides say this equally? There ..."
That is all completely ridiculous. Wheelchair ramps are comparable to annoying GIFs. That is laughable. I get migraines, if I am in a sensitive mode, then I avoid places I know I will find things that will aggravate my condition. I would never presume to be arrogant enough to tell those places they have to change everything just for me.
The ADA is about "reasonable accommodations" for handicaps. Telling a site of 10 million users that they should consider changing the way they use the site to accommodate a select few is nowhere near reasonable. A button to turn off images is, but no one should have to change their use of the site to accommodate the select few in the meantime.
>>"Why should every user have to consider changing the way they use GR because a few people are annoyed by it?"1. Because that's how society works<<
Society doesn't work that way all the time. And often when it does, the few annoyed people manage to impinge on the rights of the many unannoyed people. Life is not fair and no matter what people do, it will never be 100% fair for 100% of the people.
>>So far the solution seems to be a user-specified toggle. (Which, I repeat, is ADA-standard, just like wheelchair ramps.)<<
If a user-specified toggle is ADA-standard, can you post the pertinent information in the ADA Compliance Manual?
I did several pages ago. What I really don't understand is why you all are against this.
_It doesn't affect you_
People like me get migraines and seizures from overloads of flashing images. We are asking for a toggle that allows us to turn off all GIFs on the site.
This lets everybody who likes the GIFs to put as many of the things as they want, and it lets everyone who doesn't like them turn them off.
_WHY IS THIS A PROBLEM_??
Katherine wrote: "I did several pages ago. What I really don't understand is why you all are against this.
_It doesn't affect you_
People like me get migraines and seizures from overloads of flashing images. W..."
Honestly, I really do not know why even the idea of approaching GR staff to ask for a way to block GIFs seems to be an issue for some. And yes, maybe GR staff will not implement it, but it is definitely worth trying, worth asking.
"If a user-specified toggle is ADA-standard, can you post the pertinent information in the ADA Compliance Manual?"That information appears in message 39, on page 1 of this discussion. It is a link to the ADA Developer's Toolkit, and I have pasted the relevant text as well.
Let me also add that I find it ironic that do many people who were upset at being called "childish" and want people to be tolerant of them are dismissive of the very real health concerns of a great many people. "That is all completely ridiculous. Wheelchair ramps are comparable to annoying GIFs. That is laughable."
It is, actually. Because if a building doesn't have a wheelchair ramp I can walk in on a cane (if few steps) or be lifted in in situ. But if there are a lot of flashing GIFs I can have a seizure that renders me unconscious and could possibly kill me.
It's not just a matter of "ow, my head hurts, let's look at another page". Although that in itself is no fun.
Katherine wrote: "Let me also add that I find it ironic that do many people who were upset at being called "childish" and want people to be tolerant of them are dismissive of the very real health concerns of a great..."No no no, let's be clear...I have said repeatedly that I am supportive of the ability for users to decide whether they wish to see images or not. What I am not supportive of is the people on this thread saying that other users should just change the way they use the site until that can be implemented. So essentially that is comparing an aid for the disabled with attempting to guilt-trip someone into changing how they handle their business on the site.
I know how much you'd like to twist me into someone who's picking on you and attacking you, so you might have skipped over the part where I said I get migraines...terrible ones. Yes I'd like the ability to turn off images on bad days. But I would never in a million years suggest to the users of this site that they just stop their GIF posting behavior in order to accommodate me. That is highly arrogant. Which is what you and others have been trying to suggest and suggesting that people who refuse to change their behavior for your benefit are just inconsiderate and childish.
If you want GR to fix this issue and provide an alternative, fabulous, go forth and do so. But I find it very insulting and arrogant to request that everyone just stop doing it for the select few that it bothers.
Katherine wrote: ""If a user-specified toggle is ADA-standard, can you post the pertinent information in the ADA Compliance Manual?"That information appears in message 39, on page 1 of this discussion. It is a li..."
Katherine ~ That information specifically applies to state and local government websites.
However, why don't you just sent this information to GRs and ask them about implementing the toggle that you are looking for? Trying to get a consensus or trying to get everyone to agree on something will probably never happen.
If you don't like gifs, that's fine, but you can't police others' use of them. Tbh, I use them on Tumblr, but not on GR... But if others want to use them, I have no oroblem with it. If they're used excessively, just scroll past without reading the review.To all you people complaining about the "good old days" in GoodReads, and how it must be a young person thing... Well, social networks (and this is one, like it or not) evolve and change. And I think you're all being too judgmental. Let's focus on the good part of this: YOUNG PEOPLE ARE READING! Yay! And if using gifs in their reviews is the way for them to continue to enjoy reading and thinking critically about the books they read, then who are we to try and discourage them?
Christina wrote: "If you don't like gifs, that's fine, but you can't police others' use of them. Tbh, I use them on Tumblr, but not on GR... But if others want to use them, I have no oroblem with it. If they're used..."I think pretty much everyone has agreed that what is desired is a way for particularly sensitive people (like Katherine, who could potentially suffer a seizure - a potentially FATAL effect - due to the effects of a repeating, flashing .gif) to be able to tune them out of their feeds. I don't know if this is possible, but it would be an appropriate response in this case.
Katherine wrote: "I did several pages ago.
What I really don't understand is why you all are against this.
_It doesn't affect you_
People like me get migraines and seizures from overloads of flashing images. W..."
But people don't seem to have a problem with something being set up so people who don't want to see gifs can block them. They have had a problem with these comments:
"They literally cannot access the words to express themselves."
"You know what's disgusting? Being hit in the face with hundreds of pieces of copyright-violating visual vomit that shows people masturbating, talking about "Jizz in my pants", flashing rainbows and having fits." (I certainly haven't come across these types of gifs.)
"GOODREADS IS NOT YOUR BLOG. If you want GIFs on your tumblr where you and the rest of your drama club can laugh about it, fine. But this is a literate site for book reviews. "Literate" means "using words"."
"I honestly couldn't care less about what a 14yo Fandom Wank thought about the news of the book's impending release six months ago."
"Your gifs are inappropriate. You are not unwelcome. The stupid gifs are. You have a tumblr site. Keep them there."
You made all these comments and also called posts with comments and gifs re excitement about a book release as "stupid brainfartathons" and "LiveJournal Hello Kitty orgasmothons" and described their posters as "people too self-absorbed to understand that the world doesn't revolve around their unfettered delight". It's not really surprising that people took offence. I have never posted a gif and wouldn't be bothered if there weren't any used on the site and I find these comments offensive.
Why didn't you explain the problems you have with gifs due to your ill health/disability in your first post? Why did you instead post rude comments about gif users in several posts before mentioning it? If you only want an opportunity to block seeing gifs then why did you say (more than once) that they shouldn't be allowed/used on the site at all.
It was only when other users complained about what you said or insulted you back that you brought up your health problems. Even then you opened by saying:
"You are talking to a 42 year old disabled woman. As much as you are all "you are insensitive" I'm calling you and all the GIF users out. You are the insensitive ones."
You tried to make out that these users were not taking into account your disability when you hadn't said you had a disability and they may also not have known that flashing gifs could cause problems like seizures.
What's even worse is you first of all said "stupid ADHD brainfartathons" until someone complained and you deleted it and although you did say you had been inappropriate you still ended up turning it into another complaint about non-reviews.
"ETA: I removed the ADHD remark because it was inappropriate. I concede that. Now if only all the posters of the non-reviews would concede THEIR inappropriateness and remove those."
Users (usually younger ones) post gifs not to be insensitive, or just to annoy you or because they are incapable of thinking of the words to use. They use them because it's become part of their way of expressing themselves.
You really need to look at your behaviour on this thread before complaining about the behaviour of other users.
What I really don't understand is why you all are against this.
_It doesn't affect you_
People like me get migraines and seizures from overloads of flashing images. W..."
But people don't seem to have a problem with something being set up so people who don't want to see gifs can block them. They have had a problem with these comments:
"They literally cannot access the words to express themselves."
"You know what's disgusting? Being hit in the face with hundreds of pieces of copyright-violating visual vomit that shows people masturbating, talking about "Jizz in my pants", flashing rainbows and having fits." (I certainly haven't come across these types of gifs.)
"GOODREADS IS NOT YOUR BLOG. If you want GIFs on your tumblr where you and the rest of your drama club can laugh about it, fine. But this is a literate site for book reviews. "Literate" means "using words"."
"I honestly couldn't care less about what a 14yo Fandom Wank thought about the news of the book's impending release six months ago."
"Your gifs are inappropriate. You are not unwelcome. The stupid gifs are. You have a tumblr site. Keep them there."
You made all these comments and also called posts with comments and gifs re excitement about a book release as "stupid brainfartathons" and "LiveJournal Hello Kitty orgasmothons" and described their posters as "people too self-absorbed to understand that the world doesn't revolve around their unfettered delight". It's not really surprising that people took offence. I have never posted a gif and wouldn't be bothered if there weren't any used on the site and I find these comments offensive.
Why didn't you explain the problems you have with gifs due to your ill health/disability in your first post? Why did you instead post rude comments about gif users in several posts before mentioning it? If you only want an opportunity to block seeing gifs then why did you say (more than once) that they shouldn't be allowed/used on the site at all.
It was only when other users complained about what you said or insulted you back that you brought up your health problems. Even then you opened by saying:
"You are talking to a 42 year old disabled woman. As much as you are all "you are insensitive" I'm calling you and all the GIF users out. You are the insensitive ones."
You tried to make out that these users were not taking into account your disability when you hadn't said you had a disability and they may also not have known that flashing gifs could cause problems like seizures.
What's even worse is you first of all said "stupid ADHD brainfartathons" until someone complained and you deleted it and although you did say you had been inappropriate you still ended up turning it into another complaint about non-reviews.
"ETA: I removed the ADHD remark because it was inappropriate. I concede that. Now if only all the posters of the non-reviews would concede THEIR inappropriateness and remove those."
Users (usually younger ones) post gifs not to be insensitive, or just to annoy you or because they are incapable of thinking of the words to use. They use them because it's become part of their way of expressing themselves.
You really need to look at your behaviour on this thread before complaining about the behaviour of other users.
Chrissie wrote: "Do we all support that we want GR to add a "button" that blocks GIFs? Are we all in agreement that we request that GR does this as soon as possible?"
Even though I doubt I'd use it I'd happily support this. We shouldn't have the situation that people cannot use this site due to flashing gifs and the possible medical side effects but it would also be good if other users still had the option of adding them to their reviews.
Even though I doubt I'd use it I'd happily support this. We shouldn't have the situation that people cannot use this site due to flashing gifs and the possible medical side effects but it would also be good if other users still had the option of adding them to their reviews.
Pigletto wrote: "Chrissie wrote: "Do we all support that we want GR to add a "button" that blocks GIFs? Are we all in agreement that we request that GR does this as soon as possible?"Even though I doubt I'd use i..."
Exactly, we want everyone pleased and no one made ill.
Pigletto wrote: "Katherine wrote: "I did several pages ago. What I really don't understand is why you all are against this.
_It doesn't affect you_
People like me get migraines and seizures from overloads of f..."
So true. You will be treated how you treat others.
Gabby wrote: "Pigletto wrote: "Katherine wrote: "I did several pages ago. What I really don't understand is why you all are against this.
_It doesn't affect you_
People like me get migraines and seizures fr..."
That is so true!!
Sparrowlicious wrote: "I can understand the need of gifs if you review something on your personal blog, tumblr, anywhere, but on Goodreads?People, you're on a website about books. About WORDS. Please use words to descri..."
After I looked up what "gif" means, I have to agree with you. People, use your words! (I'm afraid for the future and the lost art of communicating.)
Christina wrote: "http://www.wikihow.com/Stop-Animated-..."Thank you, Christina. Too bad for me though because my favorite browser is Safari, and I'm in it probably 99% of time. This is very helpful information for most.
Christina wrote: "http://www.wikihow.com/Stop-Animated-..."Thank you, Christina. The first review page is now very quiet and an easy read.
Please be aware that this fix may knock out web-based email programs, so bookmark this thread in case you need to switch back to allowing GIFs.
Osho, could you explain that to me so I understand. Can Outlook be wrecked?
I don't know, but I doubt it. If anything is funny afterward, though, just follow the instructions at that link again, but type "normal" back into the box, then clear your browser cache.
That, for example, it renders my web-based mail inoperable.
Oh I wish I were an expert or had one here in the house. I am always hesitant to try stuff because I cannot fix problems. How do you learn all these terms? Is there a book to read that explains and shows you through testing examples?
I wish I had a source for you. Usually I google until I find an explanation (and I have tech people at work who can usually reset anything I can't figure out). Try PCs for Dummies, maybe?
Well, I added it Osho, but I think I have read that in an earlier version about 15 years ago. I am much better working in Word and Excell; those I was taught at work. That education was wonderful.
What has me puzzled is why this topic is posted in the discussion for this book. Personally I like the gifs even if I dont use them very much myself.
Kagama-the Literaturevixen wrote: "What has me puzzled is why this topic is posted in the discussion for this book. Personally I like the gifs even if I dont use them very much myself."
I started it here because before the book was available to the public all that was listed here were entries FILLED with GIFS. Every sinlge "review", although they really were not reviews, had GIFS. I was shocked by the experience. Too much of anything is often bad.....
Osho wrote: "Please be aware that this fix may knock out web-based email programs, so bookmark this thread in case you need to switch back to allowing GIFs."Can you be more specific. I tested the change, but my gmail was working fine, while blocking the GIF's.
Chrissie wrote: "Kagama-the Literaturevixen wrote: "What has me puzzled is why this topic is posted in the discussion for this book. Personally I like the gifs even if I dont use them very much myself."
I starte..."
Shocked seems like an overstatement,I think the word you are looking for is annoyed or irritated.
I still think that the best way to have started a discussion about this would have been if you made a "general update" status post.
Then people have the option of pressing the "like" button if they agree with you.
Kagama-the Literaturevixen wrote: "Chrissie wrote: "Kagama-the Literaturevixen wrote: "What has me puzzled is why this topic is posted in the discussion for this book. Personally I like the gifs even if I dont use them very much m..."
I used the word that expressed my feelings most appropriately.
I thought it appropriate to initiate a polite discussion.
Oh, it's being discussed over in the Goodreads Feedback group too, the GIFs.But I think this was a good place to start one of the threads. Since GIFs have been allowed at Goodreads (for many years they were not) I've seen quite a few but never like at this page pre-publication of the book. It was a page with nothing but them, and it felt very disconcerting to me. A thread here made sense, especially because the issue is also being discussed in an official group.
Lisa, do you have a link to the other discussion?
Chrissie wrote: "Lisa, do you have a link to the other discussion?"http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...
http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/9...
There are more. The second link here has been closed but is still interesting. There are so many bugs now it is hard to search groups and one's own posts too. Anyway, I think there are more links/discussion threads than these.
I don't use gifs. I don't even know how. And I definitely prefer a more adult discussion, but I think we should be glad that the younger crowd is here and reading, too. If this is the way they want to express themselves, let them. And if you're a bit too mature for the thread, then start your own. If it's a serious book discussion, I, for one, would like to join it.
Sometimes they're funny. Like the Oprah one near the top of this discussion. I don't like the ones that use rude language or pictures, though.
A picture (or gif in this case) is worth a thousand words, so really, what's the difference? People should be allowed to post what they want, if you don't like it don't look at it, and check out a wide variety of book blogs with reviews that don't have gifs in them. Nuff' said.
Jennifer wrote: "I recognize that GIFs can, in certain situations, effectively say what words alone can't. Sometimes, the excitement from the release of a book I've been waiting for years for can only be articulate..." I agree, i use GIF'S in my reviews, but very little, maybe one or two , maximum
I don't think there is such a thing as a good or bad review on a book, each person has their own way of expression and how they feel about a book. Even one sentence is fine. or 20 pages with pictures, or a book about a book, lol. Each to their own
I don't mind GIFs to be honest. They don't particularly annoy me. But I do agree with people that have mentioned kids/adolescents commenting on various things in a stereotypical 'twihard' fashion. I don't need to be told I'm a bitch/idiot/stupid etc just because I didn't like the book they're obsessed with. By the way I used Twihards as an example just because these seem to be the people I have seen give the most extreme form of abuse to fellow readers.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
The Casual Vacancy (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
PCs For Dummies (other topics)The Casual Vacancy (other topics)
Gundula, you are much more computer savvy than me."
We'll see :-) And I'm glad your "head is back in place"