Meta Question

BronxLens's avatar

Should Fluther allow still images/ video / audio to be uploaded here?

Asked by BronxLens (1539points) July 9th, 2008

We have Flickr, YouTube, yet, wouldn’t it make more sense to be able to upload content into Fluther? Could increase traffic if some content becomes available here.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

15 Answers

robmandu's avatar

Short answer: no.

Long answer.

amandaafoote's avatar

If you really want to post still images, video, audio on fluther, just post the links off of flickr and youtube

marinelife's avatar

The guys convinced me in that thread even though I had started out in favor. It was this comment of johnpowell’s that won the day: ”

Pretend that just posted a goatse or tubgirl image.

One of the nice things about this place is that it is safe for work. You don’t have to worry about getting a gif of a guy fucking a chicken on this site. People could link to them but you would have to click to see them.

My vote is for not having images.”

Mine too!

jballou's avatar

I definitely think at least images should be allowed. Without expanded features and functionality, Fluther’s growth will stunt sooner or later. Just because someone might post something inappropriate doesn’t mean the feature itself should be ignored. I consider Digg safe for work, and they have images. And the community here is way more mature then the community on

eambos's avatar

Once again, we’d become 4chan…

richardhenry's avatar

@jballou: Fluther’s growth would stunt? In what way is that true? Realistically, only a small number of questions/answers require images, and even less require videos, and it is often just as easy to provide a link. The web can hold itself up, you don’t need every site to do everything.

jballou's avatar

All I meant is that historically, when site doesn’t keep up with their growing base and “feed” them with new or expanded functionality and features, the growth of that site will usually peter off at some point. I’ve seen it happen with many a start-up, but Friendster is a great example of it. Yelp is also a good example of the reverse. Their growth was rapid at first, then it became seriously compromised. Then they started expanding their feature set, and they numbers blew up again.

What I said has nothing to do with every site doing everything. It’s just a matter of anticipating your users’ needs and wants and proactively giving them the tools they need to maximize the potential of the site. You want your user base to not only maintain, but also grow. It’s how you run a successful site.

I love using the site, and I want it to be even more successful then it is currently, and that can’t happen unless they eventually expand their features.

richardhenry's avatar

@jballou: Yes, but in competition to what? The biggest feature of a website like Fluther is the community. Websites like Friendster were more about connecting with people you already know, so you’re technically not losing any relationships by moving on.

In addition, I feel that 37signals have proven that if done right, less is more.

Why bloat web apps with semi-useful features? Especially when more innovative features, such as typing a new question and previous questions appearing in real time to avoid duplicate posts, would be much more useful. Ironically; this post itself is a duplicate post.

Knotmyday's avatar

Not in agreement, J. For one, uploading takes up server space and increases the possibility of malware, which would put a damper on the experience here. I needs my fix!
Also, I’m with jp. I do this at work.
If you need to show off stuff, you can easily do it in the chatroom.

marinelife's avatar

@jballou I also disagree. I don’t think there is enough data to support your contention that cannot survive without expanding features, especially the features proposed here..

XCNuse's avatar

I think 1 [IMG] tag which will resize to some size should be allowed for the original question asker.

dunno if that is possible or not though.

well, I shouldn’t say “allowed”, rather it would be more convenient I should say.

robmandu's avatar

Example (use your imagination):

What kind of rash is this? [Embedded image of someone’s skeevy nether region]

You could argue that it’s serious, educational, informative. But it also would completely suck to hafta deal with it, either as a mod or normal flutherite.

Um, no thanks.

marinelife's avatar

@robmandu Right, when shilolo asks for pictures of someone’s rash or pustule or whatever, I do not go look! I did once go look at a spider corpse (arachnophobe repulsion-attraction compulsion), but only for a microsecond.

scamp's avatar

I think we are doing just fine the way we are. I have no problem clicking on a link if I want to see something. I like the clean and simple look of fluther and crowding it with alot of pics and videos would detract from my enjoyment of the site. Plus, I would hate to see how much it would slow us down having all of those ‘extras.”

steelmarket's avatar

I like keeping our communications in the realm of words.
BUT, I’ve always wished that there was a web site where anyone could post a photo of something that they’ve found but cannot identify. Like a “What the heck is this thing?” kind of site.

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther