|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:44 am
... I will have to say what kind of paper? Does she think that there should be multiple colored lined paper like the kind you get out of note books? Because like how Blackcat6349 pointed out there is colored paper out there. And I'll have to agree with him on his point of racism. anyone can be racist because the very definition of the word is The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, esp. so as to distinguish it as... Or Prejudice or discrimination directed against someone of a different race based on such a belief. (Defined directly from google)
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 9:27 pm
maui boy no ka oi Or maybe racism has become such an integral part of our lives we don't even notice it? You would really be surprised at how many racists don't think they're racist at all. Believe it or not, white paper is a relatively new thing. Paper and parchment in the past were generally a more yellow-brownish color. The real question is: If we have the ability to modify the tint of paper, why would we make it a color (white) that when written on emphasizes the background over the text rather than one (black) that when written on would emphasize the text over the background? Ok, I can't read this and not comment. I agree about how the most racist don't think they are. I think most people are racist to an extent. Racial stereotyping isn't a conscious act, and I think it takes a lot of work and experience to undo. But I work with a lot of printers and NO, the colour white is not to distract from text or some deep seeded racist thing. It's because of printing with colour. Colours print out more accurately on a white page. If it's yellow, then the colours would all have a warmer tint then intended, but on white, it turns out as it's supposed to. Cheaper printing like books tend to be more yellowish, and that's because they don't need to pay for the whiter paper.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:58 pm
cristeal maui boy no ka oi Or maybe racism has become such an integral part of our lives we don't even notice it? You would really be surprised at how many racists don't think they're racist at all. Believe it or not, white paper is a relatively new thing. Paper and parchment in the past were generally a more yellow-brownish color. The real question is: If we have the ability to modify the tint of paper, why would we make it a color (white) that when written on emphasizes the background over the text rather than one (black) that when written on would emphasize the text over the background? Ok, I can't read this and not comment. I agree about how the most racist don't think they are. I think most people are racist to an extent. Racial stereotyping isn't a conscious act, and I think it takes a lot of work and experience to undo. But I work with a lot of printers and NO, the colour white is not to distract from text or some deep seeded racist thing. It's because of printing with colour. Colours print out more accurately on a white page. If it's yellow, then the colours would all have a warmer tint then intended, but on white, it turns out as it's supposed to. Cheaper printing like books tend to be more yellowish, and that's because they don't need to pay for the whiter paper. Again that's printing. We already have cheap alternatives to use on a darker shade of paper such as chalk and acrylic paints that create a coat over the paper rather than allowing the coloring material to sink into the paper. Hell acrylic paints, being slightly waterproof, even help to protect the paper while ink sinks into the paper and bleeds when it is wet. But instead of investing in research to advance the sophistication and use of paint, we went and invested all our resources into a medium of writing/printing that is difficult to preserve, is difficult to artistically manipulate, and can bleed through the paper and damage something on the other side. There is no particular reason I can see that we still use ink today other than the fact that it's been in our culture for so long for use on parchment-type paper that we simply do not wish to explore alternative means of writing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:42 pm
maui boy no ka oi cristeal maui boy no ka oi Or maybe racism has become such an integral part of our lives we don't even notice it? You would really be surprised at how many racists don't think they're racist at all. Believe it or not, white paper is a relatively new thing. Paper and parchment in the past were generally a more yellow-brownish color. The real question is: If we have the ability to modify the tint of paper, why would we make it a color (white) that when written on emphasizes the background over the text rather than one (black) that when written on would emphasize the text over the background? Ok, I can't read this and not comment. I agree about how the most racist don't think they are. I think most people are racist to an extent. Racial stereotyping isn't a conscious act, and I think it takes a lot of work and experience to undo. But I work with a lot of printers and NO, the colour white is not to distract from text or some deep seeded racist thing. It's because of printing with colour. Colours print out more accurately on a white page. If it's yellow, then the colours would all have a warmer tint then intended, but on white, it turns out as it's supposed to. Cheaper printing like books tend to be more yellowish, and that's because they don't need to pay for the whiter paper. Again that's printing. We already have cheap alternatives to use on a darker shade of paper such as chalk and acrylic paints that create a coat over the paper rather than allowing the coloring material to sink into the paper. Hell acrylic paints, being slightly waterproof, even help to protect the paper while ink sinks into the paper and bleeds when it is wet. But instead of investing in research to advance the sophistication and use of paint, we went and invested all our resources into a medium of writing/printing that is difficult to preserve, is difficult to artistically manipulate, and can bleed through the paper and damage something on the other side. There is no particular reason I can see that we still use ink today other than the fact that it's been in our culture for so long for use on parchment-type paper that we simply do not wish to explore alternative means of writing.
There's no particular reason why we call the site is called Facebook when it can just as easily be called Bookface. I mean, Bookface sounds more aesthetically appealing, so why not use that instead? See the type of argument you're making? It's just the way things turned out. And there's probably a reason for it that you aren't taking into account. For example, tree pulp is naturally bright in color, so white is more convenient to go with as it requires less chemical changes to the hue. Plus graphite is cheaper to produce than chalk or acrylic paint.
"Artists are allowed to be a bit different." - Bob Ross
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:27 pm
desuforeverlulz maui boy no ka oi cristeal maui boy no ka oi Or maybe racism has become such an integral part of our lives we don't even notice it? You would really be surprised at how many racists don't think they're racist at all. Believe it or not, white paper is a relatively new thing. Paper and parchment in the past were generally a more yellow-brownish color. The real question is: If we have the ability to modify the tint of paper, why would we make it a color (white) that when written on emphasizes the background over the text rather than one (black) that when written on would emphasize the text over the background? Ok, I can't read this and not comment. I agree about how the most racist don't think they are. I think most people are racist to an extent. Racial stereotyping isn't a conscious act, and I think it takes a lot of work and experience to undo. But I work with a lot of printers and NO, the colour white is not to distract from text or some deep seeded racist thing. It's because of printing with colour. Colours print out more accurately on a white page. If it's yellow, then the colours would all have a warmer tint then intended, but on white, it turns out as it's supposed to. Cheaper printing like books tend to be more yellowish, and that's because they don't need to pay for the whiter paper. Again that's printing. We already have cheap alternatives to use on a darker shade of paper such as chalk and acrylic paints that create a coat over the paper rather than allowing the coloring material to sink into the paper. Hell acrylic paints, being slightly waterproof, even help to protect the paper while ink sinks into the paper and bleeds when it is wet. But instead of investing in research to advance the sophistication and use of paint, we went and invested all our resources into a medium of writing/printing that is difficult to preserve, is difficult to artistically manipulate, and can bleed through the paper and damage something on the other side. There is no particular reason I can see that we still use ink today other than the fact that it's been in our culture for so long for use on parchment-type paper that we simply do not wish to explore alternative means of writing.
There's no particular reason why we call the site is called Facebook when it can just as easily be called Bookface. I mean, Bookface sounds more aesthetically appealing, so why not use that instead? See the type of argument you're making? It's just the way things turned out. And there's probably a reason for it that you aren't taking into account. For example, tree pulp is naturally bright in color, so white is more convenient to go with as it requires less chemical changes to the hue. Plus graphite is cheaper to produce than chalk or acrylic paint.
"Artists are allowed to be a bit different." - Bob Ross Again, it would be more convenient to not change the hue at all. There is absolutely nothing wrong with writing on parchment. It's not like writing on parchment/untreated paper is going to instantly make the writing illegible and unreadable. If that were the case, the yellow pages wouldn't be yellow. And even if graphite is cheaper, it is more permanent than chalk and less protective than paints. The only advantages it has, from an everyday standpoint, is that we use so little graphite in the production of pencils that it's dirt cheap and it smudges just enough to provide a semi-erasable, long-lasting solution. Although we do have semi-permanent chalk solutions so even that point may be moot. But yes that is the way things turned out. But having Comrade Stalin and Chairman Mao as national rulers during the cold war is also how things turned out. In both nations, the "bloodthirsty dictators" are regarded as heroes by the majority of the population. Does that automatically exempt them from any misdeeds they may have conducted simply because it was in the past?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2012 5:55 pm
maui boy no ka oi desuforeverlulz maui boy no ka oi cristeal maui boy no ka oi Or maybe racism has become such an integral part of our lives we don't even notice it? You would really be surprised at how many racists don't think they're racist at all. Believe it or not, white paper is a relatively new thing. Paper and parchment in the past were generally a more yellow-brownish color. The real question is: If we have the ability to modify the tint of paper, why would we make it a color (white) that when written on emphasizes the background over the text rather than one (black) that when written on would emphasize the text over the background? Ok, I can't read this and not comment. I agree about how the most racist don't think they are. I think most people are racist to an extent. Racial stereotyping isn't a conscious act, and I think it takes a lot of work and experience to undo. But I work with a lot of printers and NO, the colour white is not to distract from text or some deep seeded racist thing. It's because of printing with colour. Colours print out more accurately on a white page. If it's yellow, then the colours would all have a warmer tint then intended, but on white, it turns out as it's supposed to. Cheaper printing like books tend to be more yellowish, and that's because they don't need to pay for the whiter paper. Again that's printing. We already have cheap alternatives to use on a darker shade of paper such as chalk and acrylic paints that create a coat over the paper rather than allowing the coloring material to sink into the paper. Hell acrylic paints, being slightly waterproof, even help to protect the paper while ink sinks into the paper and bleeds when it is wet. But instead of investing in research to advance the sophistication and use of paint, we went and invested all our resources into a medium of writing/printing that is difficult to preserve, is difficult to artistically manipulate, and can bleed through the paper and damage something on the other side. There is no particular reason I can see that we still use ink today other than the fact that it's been in our culture for so long for use on parchment-type paper that we simply do not wish to explore alternative means of writing.
There's no particular reason why we call the site is called Facebook when it can just as easily be called Bookface. I mean, Bookface sounds more aesthetically appealing, so why not use that instead? See the type of argument you're making? It's just the way things turned out. And there's probably a reason for it that you aren't taking into account. For example, tree pulp is naturally bright in color, so white is more convenient to go with as it requires less chemical changes to the hue. Plus graphite is cheaper to produce than chalk or acrylic paint.
"Artists are allowed to be a bit different." - Bob Ross Again, it would be more convenient to not change the hue at all. There is absolutely nothing wrong with writing on parchment. It's not like writing on parchment/untreated paper is going to instantly make the writing illegible and unreadable. If that were the case, the yellow pages wouldn't be yellow. And even if graphite is cheaper, it is more permanent than chalk and less protective than paints. The only advantages it has, from an everyday standpoint, is that we use so little graphite in the production of pencils that it's dirt cheap and it smudges just enough to provide a semi-erasable, long-lasting solution. Although we do have semi-permanent chalk solutions so even that point may be moot. But yes that is the way things turned out. But having Comrade Stalin and Chairman Mao as national rulers during the cold war is also how things turned out. In both nations, the "bloodthirsty dictators" are regarded as heroes by the majority of the population. Does that automatically exempt them from any misdeeds they may have conducted simply because it was in the past?
That was a rather extensive false analogy. Paper being white is not like bloodthirsty dictators ruling nations. As it was said before, color stands out more purely on white backgrounds.
"Artists are allowed to be a bit different." - Bob Ross
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2012 8:53 pm
desuforeverlulz maui boy no ka oi desuforeverlulz maui boy no ka oi cristeal maui boy no ka oi Or maybe racism has become such an integral part of our lives we don't even notice it? You would really be surprised at how many racists don't think they're racist at all. Believe it or not, white paper is a relatively new thing. Paper and parchment in the past were generally a more yellow-brownish color. The real question is: If we have the ability to modify the tint of paper, why would we make it a color (white) that when written on emphasizes the background over the text rather than one (black) that when written on would emphasize the text over the background? Ok, I can't read this and not comment. I agree about how the most racist don't think they are. I think most people are racist to an extent. Racial stereotyping isn't a conscious act, and I think it takes a lot of work and experience to undo. But I work with a lot of printers and NO, the colour white is not to distract from text or some deep seeded racist thing. It's because of printing with colour. Colours print out more accurately on a white page. If it's yellow, then the colours would all have a warmer tint then intended, but on white, it turns out as it's supposed to. Cheaper printing like books tend to be more yellowish, and that's because they don't need to pay for the whiter paper. Again that's printing. We already have cheap alternatives to use on a darker shade of paper such as chalk and acrylic paints that create a coat over the paper rather than allowing the coloring material to sink into the paper. Hell acrylic paints, being slightly waterproof, even help to protect the paper while ink sinks into the paper and bleeds when it is wet. But instead of investing in research to advance the sophistication and use of paint, we went and invested all our resources into a medium of writing/printing that is difficult to preserve, is difficult to artistically manipulate, and can bleed through the paper and damage something on the other side. There is no particular reason I can see that we still use ink today other than the fact that it's been in our culture for so long for use on parchment-type paper that we simply do not wish to explore alternative means of writing.
There's no particular reason why we call the site is called Facebook when it can just as easily be called Bookface. I mean, Bookface sounds more aesthetically appealing, so why not use that instead? See the type of argument you're making? It's just the way things turned out. And there's probably a reason for it that you aren't taking into account. For example, tree pulp is naturally bright in color, so white is more convenient to go with as it requires less chemical changes to the hue. Plus graphite is cheaper to produce than chalk or acrylic paint.
"Artists are allowed to be a bit different." - Bob Ross Again, it would be more convenient to not change the hue at all. There is absolutely nothing wrong with writing on parchment. It's not like writing on parchment/untreated paper is going to instantly make the writing illegible and unreadable. If that were the case, the yellow pages wouldn't be yellow. And even if graphite is cheaper, it is more permanent than chalk and less protective than paints. The only advantages it has, from an everyday standpoint, is that we use so little graphite in the production of pencils that it's dirt cheap and it smudges just enough to provide a semi-erasable, long-lasting solution. Although we do have semi-permanent chalk solutions so even that point may be moot. But yes that is the way things turned out. But having Comrade Stalin and Chairman Mao as national rulers during the cold war is also how things turned out. In both nations, the "bloodthirsty dictators" are regarded as heroes by the majority of the population. Does that automatically exempt them from any misdeeds they may have conducted simply because it was in the past?
That was a rather extensive false analogy. Paper being white is not like bloodthirsty dictators ruling nations. As it was said before, color stands out more purely on white backgrounds.
"Artists are allowed to be a bit different." - Bob Ross Graphite isn't colored. I don't see how color standing out has anything to do with your previous post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2012 11:35 pm
maui boy no ka oi Graphite isn't colored. I don't see how color standing out has anything to do with your previous post.
This argument is incredibly pointless and I am not focusing my efforts to re-structure every counterargument every post I make.
"Artists are allowed to be a bit different." - Bob Ross
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
