New Banner - Voting thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Which Banner do you want?

  • Total voters
    17
  • Poll closed .
BrightLampShade

BrightLampShade

Well-Known Member
Forum Moderator
Feb 14, 2011
13,495
2,568
113
The North West
The time has come to vote for what new banner we want. I have taken the suggestions from the previous thread and here are the viable options

A.
You must log in or register to see images


B.
You must log in or register to see images


C.
You must log in or register to see images


D.
You must log in or register to see images


E.
All our avatars blended together.
 
Driver E wont win this because his car is 10 seconds off the pace. I think D is best.
 
Fred! said:
Driver E wont win this because his car is 10 seconds off the pace. I think D is best.
Click to expand...

D cheated though, his car clearly used [insert fictitious performance enhancement device] when the rules state it's illegal. E has better rule management than D.
 
But theres no point being good at rule management if you're 10 seconds off the pace! It's like HRT this year. Driver D has gotten away with everything in his career!
 
For me, it's clear cut:
C
–Wonderfully atmospheric, obviously F1 but unusually anonymous – and perfectly cropped!
 
I need to make a couple of points about avatars.
This post of mine is in no way intended to upset anyone; whether an ordinary member of the site; a moderator; an administrator or indeed the site owner.

The first point is simply my opinion.
The second is my personal preference.
*The third concerns the legal position, which appears to have been given no prior consideration, and I will presume was not known to the member who proposed the avatar idea (which I believe was done in good faith), nor the moderation team who have allowed the proposal to reach this stage and feature as an option on a well-intentioned poll. I apologise for the use of what may sound like legal jargon; but it is necessary in order to be completely unambiguous.


  • Avatars for a forum banner could immediately alienate non-members who may perceive such a banner as élitism or otherwise defining or reflecting status.


  • I have no wish for my avatar to be used by anyone but me – anywhere, and for whatever purpose – and explicitly refuse authorisation of its use in this site and elsewhere.


  • *Unless specifically stated or donated by the user, a personalised avatar for use on any web-site remains the sole property of either: a/the user who uploaded it; or b/ the person(s) who originally granted permission for its use to the user; and for its use to be in accord with reasonable and law abiding rules of such a web-site and any such permissions if and when granted by the user; but explicitly this does not constitute any part of the intellectual property of a web-site or its owner(s)*.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1703082

*In this sense, a personal avatar can be thought of as equivalent to a company logo (such as a car manufacturer's badge or moniker), where permission must be sought and granted before its reproduction.
 
cosicave said:
I need to make a couple of points about avatars.
This post of mine is in no way intended to upset anyone; whether an ordinary member of the site; a moderator; an administrator or indeed the site owner.

The first point is simply my opinion.
The second is my personal preference.
*The third concerns the legal position, which appears to have been given no prior consideration, and I will presume was not known to the member who proposed the avatar idea (which I believe was done in good faith), nor the moderation team who have allowed the proposal to reach this stage and feature as an option on a well-intentioned poll. I apologise for the use of what may sound like legal jargon; but it is necessary in order to be completely unambiguous.

  • Avatars for a forum banner could immediately alienate non-members who may perceive such a banner as élitism or otherwise defining or reflecting status.
  • I have no wish for my avatar to be used by anyone but me – anywhere, and for whatever purpose – and explicitly refuse authorisation of its use in this site and elsewhere.
  • *Unless specifically stated or donated by the user, a personalised avatar for use on any web-site remains the sole property of either: a/the user who uploaded it; or b/ the person(s) who originally granted permission for its use to the user; and for its use to be in accord with reasonable and law abiding rules of such a web-site and any such permissions if and when granted by the user; but explicitly this does not constitute any part of the intellectual property of a web-site or its owner(s)*.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1703082

*In this sense, a personal avatar can be thought of as equivalent to a company logo (such as a car manufacturer's badge or moniker), where permission must be sought and granted before its reproduction.
Click to expand...


Yeah we get your point.
 
cosicave said:
I need to make a couple of points about avatars.
This post of mine is in no way intended to upset anyone; whether an ordinary member of the site; a moderator; an administrator or indeed the site owner.

The first point is simply my opinion.
The second is my personal preference.
*The third concerns the legal position, which appears to have been given no prior consideration, and I will presume was not known to the member who proposed the avatar idea (which I believe was done in good faith), nor the moderation team who have allowed the proposal to reach this stage and feature as an option on a well-intentioned poll. I apologise for the use of what may sound like legal jargon; but it is necessary in order to be completely unambiguous.


  • Avatars for a forum banner could immediately alienate non-members who may perceive such a banner as élitism or otherwise defining or reflecting status.


  • I have no wish for my avatar to be used by anyone but me – anywhere, and for whatever purpose – and explicitly refuse authorisation of its use in this site and elsewhere.


  • *Unless specifically stated or donated by the user, a personalised avatar for use on any web-site remains the sole property of either: a/the user who uploaded it; or b/ the person(s) who originally granted permission for its use to the user; and for its use to be in accord with reasonable and law abiding rules of such a web-site and any such permissions if and when granted by the user; but explicitly this does not constitute any part of the intellectual property of a web-site or its owner(s)*.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1703082

*In this sense, a personal avatar can be thought of as equivalent to a company logo (such as a car manufacturer's badge or moniker), where permission must be sought and granted before its reproduction.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you signed a (terms and conditions) when you joined this site didn't you? We have no rights! :laugh:
 
Off topic but perhaps of further value:
SilverArrow said:
Yeah, but you signed a (terms and conditions) when you joined this site didn't you? We have no rights! :laugh:
Click to expand...
Yeah, very funny, Silver!
I know you're playing but you've actually raised another point. So, for a bit more fun…

Terms and conditions of any site must respect the rights of its contributors, which include the intellectual property (and its copyright) of both parties, as well as respecting all reasonable expectations of privacy of, from or by any of its contributors – which necessarily includes all intellectual property, in any case.

The 'Terms and Conditions' of any publicly accessible site are roughly equivalent to laws applicable to publicly accessible places, with respect to both the interests of the community as a whole and all of its individual members. This includes the use of private property when granting public access to it, despite the property owner's right to impose 'sub-rules' compliant with over-riding 'common law'.

Although 'Internet Law' (see point 3: "Norms") is still in its infancy, it already has clear and emergent form, with many precedents already set and enforced. It should be self-evident that this is especially applicable to a forum!
:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back