Unlimited Userpics

[tmelange]

Title
Unlimited Userpics

Short, concise description of the idea
I want unlimited userpics. Would be happy to pay.

Full description of the ideaMy userpics are maxed out, but if I want to rotate them, I'll lose all pic designations for the individual posts for the deleted userpic. I really want unlimited userpics...and would be very happy to pay for

Comments

[azurelunatic]

Even having a listing of icon keywords for previous icons would be a help. LJ does store the icon keywords with the entry, so if an icon is deleted, even though the icon displayed goes back to the default, the icon keyword is still there on the entry. If, in the future, another icon (or even the same icon) with that same keyword is uploaded, the old entry with that keyword will display the new icon with that keyword.

But it would be nice to have a way of tracking which keywords were used in the past so it would be possible to rotate icons.

[afuna]

I like this more than the original suggestion. I tend to use keywords like "ermmm" and "hmm...", and I can never remember how many m's and periods I've used. Even though any new icons uploaded with an old keyword will show up in entries/comments using that old keyword, it doesn't really help me since I don't know what keywords I used to use.

[thewhiteowl]

+1

[hammond]

I really like this idea much more than the original suggestion.

+1

[beckyzoole]

If LJ charges enough so that they're able to cover the costs of additional servers and whatnot -- why not allow more userpics?

Not unlimited, though. Sales in increments of 10, 50, 100, etc is fine, but unlimited is too dangerous.

[arianstarr]

Definitely interested in more userpics. Unlimited userpics is, I think, a different issue altogether - I get that it would probably affect server usage and all that other crap that the awesome people who run LJ have to deal with - but even increasing the userpics to 200 is a step in the right direction for those of us who are icon addicts. If it's a service that users are being charged for at a reasonable rate, then it stands to reason that the resulting repercussions can be dealt with just as easily as any other improvement of service would be.

[solvingmypuzzle]

+1

I think increments of 50 would be reasonably, and I like the suggestions about bandwidth per user as those suggestions relate to voice posts v. user pics.

Similar suggestion

[ankhorite]

+1

I filed a similar suggestion, with more detail and more limits, but I am signing on to this one just as happily.

If it is a server issue, why can't our payments buy better equipment? We'll pay, we'll pay! :)

And I still don't understand why (or if) one user with 200 pics is more of a burden than two users with 100 pics.