5 ms·

There were good communities and bad communities. I really don't think profile pictures have much to do with it.

toolz 4y ago
I'd be very surprised if profile pictures didn't have a large impact. Anything you can do to make one end of a conversation seem more human would (I suspect) have large implications in how the other end engages/reacts. Without human identifiers it's much easier to address an opinion without consideration for the human who is expressing that opinion. I believe many people might take for granted just how much non-verbal signals play a part in effective communication. A smiling picture signals to me, before reading any of the users text, that they are generally a person with a pleasant disposition. There are likely strong non-verbal cues than a profile picture, but they seem likely to play a part and when that part is going from virtually zero non-verbal signals to one, I imagine the impact is noticeable.
- usrn 4y ago
  I'd argue that profile pictures might even make things worse because people get tempted to use pictures of themselves which drags difficult (and completely irrelevant) ideas like race and sexuality into the situation. EDIT (out of quota):It's not that your profile picture would be actively used against you, but it's going to create a subconscious effect. Also they take up a ton of space in a text only chat. I stand by the idea that profile pictures are just stupid.
  - toolz 4y ago
    hmm, I'm not sure I'd agree that those things are irrelevant. Maybe it's a subjective understanding of whether a community is more likely to use those context clues to engage more personally and develop relationships or if they're more likely to use those context clues to exclude people. I'm optimistic that the vast majority of communities use those context clues to better understand someone as opposed to exclude them. I don't believe that holds true universally, but I would probably avoid using a revealing profile picture in communities I suspected would use that against me.

I'd be very surprised if profile pictures didn't have a large impact. Anything you can do to make one end of a conversation seem more human would (I suspect) have large implications in how the other end engages/reacts. Without human identifiers it's much easier to address an opinion without consideration for the human who is expressing that opinion. I believe many people might take for granted just how much non-verbal signals play a part in effective communication. A smiling picture signals to me, before reading any of the users text, that they are generally a person with a pleasant disposition. There are likely strong non-verbal cues than a profile picture, but they seem likely to play a part and when that part is going from virtually zero non-verbal signals to one, I imagine the impact is noticeable.

usrn 4y ago
I'd argue that profile pictures might even make things worse because people get tempted to use pictures of themselves which drags difficult (and completely irrelevant) ideas like race and sexuality into the situation. EDIT (out of quota):It's not that your profile picture would be actively used against you, but it's going to create a subconscious effect. Also they take up a ton of space in a text only chat. I stand by the idea that profile pictures are just stupid.
- toolz 4y ago
  hmm, I'm not sure I'd agree that those things are irrelevant. Maybe it's a subjective understanding of whether a community is more likely to use those context clues to engage more personally and develop relationships or if they're more likely to use those context clues to exclude people. I'm optimistic that the vast majority of communities use those context clues to better understand someone as opposed to exclude them. I don't believe that holds true universally, but I would probably avoid using a revealing profile picture in communities I suspected would use that against me.