Thoughts on stuff said so far:
• "Other forums have larger avatar dimensions":
questionable. From this sample, we see that avatar sizes and limitations are highly variable and that our standard users appear to sit relatively high in comparison to other forums. This argument doesn't hold real weight.
• "Increasing limits will discourage donations": a) if avatar sizes are as big a deal as they're being made out to be in here then this is certainly true, haha. But anyway I agree with this to an extent. Increasing avatar sizes to 150x for regular members results in the removal of a perk from the Silver tier (and the "raise Silver limitations" argument is an example of the snowball effect, and is therefore an argument
against raising avatar limits), and it is undeniable that some people do donate for perks alone. In fact, it's pretty ineffectual to debate if people donate for donation's sake or for the perks because the answer is "both". People donate for all sorts of reasons and I'm sure that many of them include perks, and many don't. However, the fact that
some of them are for perks means that perks are still an important consideration when discussing things like this.
However you should remember that b), as Jake pointed out, supportership is not a purchase. It is a donation. Therefore, if we were to raise regular avatar limits, this does not mean that we have short-changed the supporters. The supporter system is highly fluid and has changed, and will continue to change, dramatically over time. So, while as I said earlier it is important that we consider which perks are available to our supporters as some people donate for those perks, the argument that it is unfair on supporters for us to up the avatar limit isn't valid as supporters didn't purchase a larger avatar limit (or, well, anything). This is not to say that we will disregard the opinions of existing supporters on this, but it does mean that we aren't bound by any sale to you to give you a larger avatar than a regular member.
• "130x is too small": more subjective, but I disagree entirely. A post is about its content, not the image sat next to it. 130x is more than ample to lend a little individuality to your post along with our generous signature limits and usertitle length limits. Additionally, the 1MB filesize limit allows you to use reasonably sized animated .gifs and high-quality images. Make your posts stand out by their content, not by the fluff surrounding it (which, as I say, we already give you quite a lot of).
• "Just donate for it": while we offer a range of ways to purchase supportership, this isn't viable or desirable for everybody. This is unfortunate, but short of scrapping the entire supporter system and giving everyone everything, we cannot resolve this issue. As Shovel Knight correctly pointed out, it's impossible to make everybody happy and put everybody on the same level with the system we currently have. On a personal note I would like nothing more than to scrap supportership and take the entire money aspect out of PokéCommunity, but this isn't viable and obviously isn't going to happen. So while I don't think that "spend money on it" is an excellent answer to this, I do acknowledge that it's the only one that we have and that, as long as we use our supporter system, it's always going to have to be an answer. It isn't going anywhere so there's no point in debating it.
So, my thoughts on if we should up the avatar limits or not: no, we should not. I think that what you have is ample and that upping it would cause issues on the supporter end of things. I don't agree with every argument against raising avatar limits presented in this thread, but the ones that I think are valid are enough to convince me not to support this.
...of course that's just my (excessively long-winded) view on things but there you go. $0.02 and all that.
