rigorousintuition.ca

Stewie!

'....and came ye willingly,....to the place of your own execution?.....'

Don't kid yerself boyo - we haven't even tapped the Sheffield steel yet - and then there's the Cornweall irregulars......

- & we've still got the Gloucester homeboys in reserve - they chase a big fucking cheese down a (45*) hill, aiming straight for a brick wall @ the bottom

- day ain't over !

ruh-ro!

Here we go again.

chump » Wed Sep 21, 2016 11:26 am wrote:

Anyone here own the red dot?

This is the thread for submitting comments on images in the "Images Only" thread.

Most of us have broken the thread's rules, just as I did when I posted the thread title. Had dada been a bit more perceptive he might have realized I wasn't castigating him, but also broke the rules. That fired up his imagination.

But nevertheless, his art is a violation, as it is captioned. Many have done the same by posting some FB post they saw they felt were pointed or humorous.

So how about we all begin once again. No more posting of gif's, moving images or photos or art with words. Sorry, Mr. Fish.

Oh, complaints about images in the images only thread should be posted here, in this thread.

Dada, while I appreciate your creative efforts, others do not. The lounge might be a forum more suited to your form of artistic expression. If you feel you want to discuss your artwork, GD might be the place to go. Why create enemies unnecessarily when cooperation is a far better solution to resolving differences in opinion or at least for discussion of any certain topic.

No, I'm not bending on this. I've been posting on this board for nine years, and the majority of my posts have been on the image thread. I have as much say as any one else on this.

If someone posts a political cartoon, it will have words in it. "No words" and "no captions" are words and captions outside of the image.

edited to add: I mean, where do you draw the line? If someone posts a picture of The Arcadian Shepherds, it says 'et in arcadia ego' on the tomb. Is that a violation? Is that okay, because it's a 'classic work of art?' Who makes the rules. I think I'm acting within the boundaries.

I can respect Freitag's comment. He says my pictures are cringeworthy. I even get a kick out of it, makes me smile. But all this breaking the rules stuff, I think is just a few of you being silly. Maybe I'm pushing boundaries, taking liberties. I'm not hurting the integrity of the sacred image thread. Thinking and creativity aren't always neat and pretty things.

^^^ Yes. I mentioned that we have all broken the thread rules. Maybe not all, but many, for sure. I suggested everyone begin to cooperate with the thread originator's request, not just you.

I do know what words are dada. I can recognize them whether they are inserted into the artwork or added below it. Even when unaccompanied by art, I know a word when I see one.

You've been having your say right along, in your art. Try to create some art that effectively conveys your message without words, you know, something like this someone might post about an uncooperative asshole:

Iamwhomiam » Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:04 am wrote:^^^ Yes. I mentioned that we have all broken the thread rules. Maybe not all, but many, for sure. I suggested everyone begin to cooperate with the thread originator's request, not just you.

I do know what words are dada. I can recognize them whether they are inserted into the artwork or added below it. Even when unaccompanied by art, I know a word when I see one.

You've been having your say right along, in your art. Try to create some art that effectively conveys your message without words, you know, something like this someone might post about an uncooperative asshole:

I just explained that I disagree with you about the rules.

And I didn't think we were disagreeing about what the definition of the word 'words' is. We both know what words are, obviously.

I don't consider my stuff 'art.' I'm not one of those people that thinks so highly of themselves, an artiste. Rarely do I create something that I think of as art.

Some things are easier to say in pictures. When I'm moved to create something without words, I do. When it happens it happens, I don't usually try. If you'd like me to create a picture with no words, I'll see what I come up with. Never let it be said that I'm not open to taking requests. But I can't promise anything.

edited to add: I should clarify, I meant 'I have as much say as anyone else' as to what is a violation of the image thread, not 'I have a say' on the image thread. It seems like you conflated the two.

By the way, creating takes time and thought. It isn't all search and click, one two three done, like the 'person being an uncooperative asshole' image. They're really two different animals. I guess I make it look too easy.

Speaking of that 'person being an uncooperative asshole' image, if I didn't know any better, I'd think you were passive-aggressively implying something. But I don't think you'd be that mean-spirited just because we have a difference of opinion on the image thread rules. I'll take it you were just using it as an example to keep the mood light.

Edited to add this intro: dada and I cross-posted. He edited his comment above before I posted my first comment here this evening, and this is my response to that edit.

Yes, I'm sure many of our refrigerators are covered with similar "cringe worthy" "art."

Hey, I really don't care. You turned this into an issue, through your "art" when you jumped on me after misunderstanding my post, which simply copied the thread title, thinking I was castigating you for breaking the rules which I myself did by posting it.

You created and used your own character's captions to carry on a dialogue, which is a bit different than posting a captioned cartoon, and it was unwelcomed by several members. I suggested a few alternatives for you to explore as a means to satisfy all concerned parties. Do as you wish. It really doesn't matter to me what you choose to do, or whether folk here find you lovable or despicable.

Perhaps next time you'll think about what I wrote before reacting to one of my comments or postings.

Be creative: Try something new.

If you'd like me to create a picture with no words, I'll see what I come up with. Never let it be said that I'm not open to taking requests. But I can't promise anything.

Thank you for being flexible and responsive to other poster's concerns. That's cooperation!

Iamwhomiam » Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:25 am wrote:Edited to add this intro: dada and I cross-posted. He edited his comment above before I posted my first comment here this evening, and this is my response to that edit.

Yes, I'm sure many of our refrigerators are covered with similar "cringe worthy" "art."

Hey, I really don't care. You turned this into an issue, through your "art" when you jumped on me after misunderstanding my post, which simply copied the thread title, thinking I was castigating you for breaking the rules which I myself did by posting it.

You created and used your own character's captions to carry on a dialogue, which is a bit different than posting a captioned cartoon, and it was unwelcomed by several members. I suggested a few alternatives for you to explore as a means to satisfy all concerned parties. Do as you wish. It really doesn't matter to me what you choose to do, or whether folk here find you lovable or despicable.

Perhaps next time you'll think about what I wrote before reacting to one of my comments or postings.

Be creative: Try something new.

So all of this negativity is just about that comment I made?

Well, I'm sorry. I truly apologize, Iamwhoiam. And not because 'you really showed me, taught me a lesson here,' but because I feel bad for hurting your feelings. Life is too short to carry around ridiculous baggage like that.

Some people find me lovable, some despicable. That's my life, in the real world. You can't let that stop you. Not everyone is going to love you. And I've read about as many comments approving of my 'art' as disapproving. Maybe you missed the supportive ones, but I didn't.

In a way, I like that it's either love or hate. Evoking a strong response. Of course now the haters will ignore me. That's alright, I get it.

I don't believe I was being negative. Perhaps I was a bit, here and there. You've not offended me in the least and owe me no apology.

I laughed when my confirmation bias was confirmed by your confirmation bias, your seeing criticism where none existed. In fact, my comment was more egregious a violation than yours, 'cause mine had no image whatsoever, only words.

Hey it's ok though. I think being controversial provokes discussion, but at what cost?
Why provoke without necessity?

Iamwhomiam » Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:03 am wrote:I don't believe I was being negative. Perhaps I was a bit, here and there. You've not offended me in the least and owe me no apology.

I laughed when my confirmation bias was confirmed by your confirmation bias, your seeing criticism where none existed. In fact, my comment was more egregious a violation than yours, 'cause mine had no image whatsoever, only words.

Hey it's ok though. I think being controversial provokes discussion, but at what cost?
Why provoke without necessity?

See, I feel better. It seems to me we're talking this out. I'm glad. Cooler heads actually do prevail.

Well, others are enjoying the pictures, though. It's not controversial to them. Sometimes when I post a picture, I get a positive response in reply. That's a good feeling. Should I worry more about the people who are bothered by them, or the ones who are enjoying them? This is one of those places where I can't really please everyone.

The natural thing for me to suggest is, why not just scroll by the stuff you don't like? Not just you, but the others who aren't enjoying it. Or you could certainly keep giving me shit about it:) I don't mean that in a bad way, I really don't mind. Believe it or not, by tomorrow I probably won't even remember who said what to me. And someone I disagree with today, I'll agree with next week.