If that's how it's interpreted, feel free to delete posts 267 -271
@President_DonaldDuck :
> Satire or not, it's off-topic.
"Satire that the censor understands is rightfully confiscated." (Karl Kraus)
krasnaya
> Satire or not, it's off-topic.
"Satire that the censor understands is rightfully confiscated." (Karl Kraus)
krasnaya
I have some points I could make about that but commenting about your comment about a mod's comment about something that was deemed off topic would really be going off onto a tangent :P
@zagaberoo @chessspy1 I wouldn't say a judgement on communicative art, i.e. design, adheres only to subjective criteria. And I am very much intolerant to some opinions. Also, while a judgement on Art tout court may be wholly subjective, that doesn't mean it isn't, or shouldn't be, universal. And again I am very much intolerant to some opinions.
There is a pitfall in the nowadays all too common aesthetic thinking of art as (mere) subjective expression, in which nothing is at stake, since any conflict is made harmless in the name of "taste". Of course what makes art art is exactly that something is at stake...
That being said, I do not believe in voting on art, since I may hope that our would-be revolutionary logo is still too aristocratic for that!
There is a pitfall in the nowadays all too common aesthetic thinking of art as (mere) subjective expression, in which nothing is at stake, since any conflict is made harmless in the name of "taste". Of course what makes art art is exactly that something is at stake...
That being said, I do not believe in voting on art, since I may hope that our would-be revolutionary logo is still too aristocratic for that!
@President_DonaldDuck said (#273):
> about something that was deemed off topic would really be going off onto a tangent :P
You are right and we should strictly stick to the topic of the "freedom knight" (see: lichess.org/blog/XeRN0BAAACAA7HJu/a-new-logo-for-lichess): i wonder if this freedom horse is kept in a freedom stable on a freedom leash? Is it force-fed freedom hay while living its freedom life until it is used to produce freedom-horsemeat?
And while we have the freedom knight as an icon for this freedom site, will we still be allowed to play chess or do we have to switch to freedom chess?
Questions, questions ....
Sorry for my lapse: freedom questions, of course!
krasnaya
> about something that was deemed off topic would really be going off onto a tangent :P
You are right and we should strictly stick to the topic of the "freedom knight" (see: lichess.org/blog/XeRN0BAAACAA7HJu/a-new-logo-for-lichess): i wonder if this freedom horse is kept in a freedom stable on a freedom leash? Is it force-fed freedom hay while living its freedom life until it is used to produce freedom-horsemeat?
And while we have the freedom knight as an icon for this freedom site, will we still be allowed to play chess or do we have to switch to freedom chess?
Questions, questions ....
Sorry for my lapse: freedom questions, of course!
krasnaya
@krasnaya
Lol, you crack me up. "freedom leash"
Yes, Lichess will be switching to freedom chess. In this variant when one deviates from known lines the server automatically terminates the game with the deviating side getting being punished with the loss. Do it too many times and your account gets banned.
All hail the Supreme Leader Chairman Thibault!
Lol, you crack me up. "freedom leash"
Yes, Lichess will be switching to freedom chess. In this variant when one deviates from known lines the server automatically terminates the game with the deviating side getting being punished with the loss. Do it too many times and your account gets banned.
All hail the Supreme Leader Chairman Thibault!
I still say it looks like a male seahorse holding eggs..however..if my neighbour wants to paint his side of the fence puce-pink,he is entirely at liberty to do so..it's his part of the fence.
With all due respect @GSP0113 re your post #266
Generally when 'the people' vote as in politics there is usually perceived to be some distinct advantage one way or the other.
A vote for higher wages in some industry foe example would be seen as 'good' for the workers and 'bad' for the bosses. I know, before the nit pickers pop in and say this is not always the case, that this is a simplification but as an example of 'the resaons for voting' it will do.
In this case we are discussing 'art' and that can only be totally subjective to one's own point of view.
So, saying derogatory things like "it looks like a seahorse" is a bit pointless.
As for the mass of talent out there. I personally doubt that design is so easy.
In fact in all my years of studying the different designs of chess pieces, I can say that good design is pretty scant.
As I am sure will be pointed out. that is entirely subjective (but based on many years of research and thousands of sets of all periods from the 11c onward).
Generally when 'the people' vote as in politics there is usually perceived to be some distinct advantage one way or the other.
A vote for higher wages in some industry foe example would be seen as 'good' for the workers and 'bad' for the bosses. I know, before the nit pickers pop in and say this is not always the case, that this is a simplification but as an example of 'the resaons for voting' it will do.
In this case we are discussing 'art' and that can only be totally subjective to one's own point of view.
So, saying derogatory things like "it looks like a seahorse" is a bit pointless.
As for the mass of talent out there. I personally doubt that design is so easy.
In fact in all my years of studying the different designs of chess pieces, I can say that good design is pretty scant.
As I am sure will be pointed out. that is entirely subjective (but based on many years of research and thousands of sets of all periods from the 11c onward).
@chessspy1 said (#278):
> In this case we are discussing 'art' and that can only be totally subjective to one's own point of view.
Sorry, but this is bovine manure: If 'art' is totally subjective there would be no - objective - difference between Shakespeare and, say, the twittering of Donald Trump, there would be no difference between the symphonies of Beethoven and the, ahem, "works" of David Hasselhoff and there would be no difference between Michelangelos Sixtinian Chapel and me peeing a pattern against a wall.
Of course are there objective criteria for art! If you would have a definition of "art" (or any other word, for that matter) that covers everything the word would start to lose its meaning. If everything is "art", then "art" is no longer describing something with some fixed set of properties but anything. There is already a word for that - "anything" - and we don't need another one - "art" - for that.
(Corollary: this is the same reason as why i object against the "freedom knight". Whatever "freedom" means or should mean - there are several definitions at large and they all contradict each other - the icon of a chess piece doesn't meet that at all. So, if you want the word "freedom" to have/retain some meaning you should wisely choose the places where you use it.)
It may be hard to define what these objective criteria for art are and, yes, i cannot offer a conclusive answer the the question of what they are. But - see above - they are there otherwise nothing makes sense any more.
krasnaya
> In this case we are discussing 'art' and that can only be totally subjective to one's own point of view.
Sorry, but this is bovine manure: If 'art' is totally subjective there would be no - objective - difference between Shakespeare and, say, the twittering of Donald Trump, there would be no difference between the symphonies of Beethoven and the, ahem, "works" of David Hasselhoff and there would be no difference between Michelangelos Sixtinian Chapel and me peeing a pattern against a wall.
Of course are there objective criteria for art! If you would have a definition of "art" (or any other word, for that matter) that covers everything the word would start to lose its meaning. If everything is "art", then "art" is no longer describing something with some fixed set of properties but anything. There is already a word for that - "anything" - and we don't need another one - "art" - for that.
(Corollary: this is the same reason as why i object against the "freedom knight". Whatever "freedom" means or should mean - there are several definitions at large and they all contradict each other - the icon of a chess piece doesn't meet that at all. So, if you want the word "freedom" to have/retain some meaning you should wisely choose the places where you use it.)
It may be hard to define what these objective criteria for art are and, yes, i cannot offer a conclusive answer the the question of what they are. But - see above - they are there otherwise nothing makes sense any more.
krasnaya
so you say "in my opinon the new logo is great THEREFORE any vote would be timewasting"
Wonderful representation of the democracy of the internet...
Wonderful representation of the democracy of the internet...
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.