• PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    28 days ago

    ml: We’re going to tear down the whole capitalistic structure, nothing short of full revolution will suffice.

    Also ml: Hey stop! You’re gonna get me in trouble!

    I do the same thing when people post full text, but I’m also not claiming to be anti-establishment. I want online newspapers to make a living and survive, that’s why I do it.

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      28 days ago

      Newspapers should post full color porn in their papers. Print media wouldn’t be dying if you could get tits delivered to your doorstep daily!

    • nutomic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      27 days ago

      Do you think all of lemmy.ml is a single person? In this case its just the decision of a single moderator, nothing to do with admins.

      • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        27 days ago

        Completely fair. Also, looking at this person’s history, it looks like he decides that way for the exact same reason I do, that it’s good for authors to get paid for their work. Nothing necessarily to do with trouble.

      • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        27 days ago

        Nobody. As someone rightly pointed out, the mod’s concern is purely for the ethical issues, which is the same concern I would have in that situation.

        Also, the original post’s modlog is getting hilarious. Hexbear users are coming in and repeatedly posting the full text, which the mod is soberly removing over and over. It’s almost as if telling an entire community that they’re privileged to go and start trouble wherever they feel like will create a toxic environment.

        • koavf@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          27 days ago

          The thread was locked several hours ago because it was all just talking about talking, not talking about the actual topic. Unfortunately, several comments deliberately broke the Code of Conduct here and it seems like they were all from Hexbear users (which is something I had never heard of, I guess it’s an instance where there’s no expectation to be civil and maybe anti-social behavior is explicitly rewarded?).

  • Dr. Wesker@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    28 days ago
    Comic Sans Got the Last Laugh
    Simon Garfield
    7 - 9 minutes
    
    The backlash against the world’s most hated font may finally be ending.
    Illustration by Erik Carter
    
    On the morning of July 4, 2012, two big headlines came from CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, in Geneva. The first was that the Italian physicist Fabiola Gianotti had made a significant discovery in quantum field theory. The second was that her PowerPoint presentation about it had been delivered in Comic Sans. Hilarity competed with outrage: Critics argued that Comic Sans was a font for children’s-party invitations, with a promise of fun and games. It was not meant for important developments in particle mass. Lisa Randall, the first tenured female theoretical-physics professor at Harvard, emailed Gianotti with congratulations and the question on everybody’s mind: Why Comic Sans? “Because I like it,” Gianotti replied.
    
    Comic Sans has long been the “Macarena” of fonts. Type aficionados don’t like it, the way coffee connoisseurs don’t like Starbucks. It is the font everyone loves to hate. But I love to love it. More than the typeface itself, I love the idea of Comic Sans: a set of letters that can make people suddenly intrigued, and sometimes cross. No other font gets people so worked up. When was the last time you had an argument over Garamond or Calibri?
    
    Comic Sans wasn’t always so reviled. In 1994, Vincent Connare, a typographic engineer at Microsoft, designed it for Microsoft Bob, a program that taught users how to operate their computer. An animated dog named Rover would pop up with speech bubbles of helpful tips. Connare thought the font should look friendly, so he designed the letters to resemble the print from the comic books he had around his office. The letters were not uniformly spaced, and carried elements that in a formal typeface would be considered unacceptable; p wasn’t a mirror-opposite of q, for example. “The initial idea took minutes,” Connare told me. “I never thought it would be set in all caps, so I didn’t worry about how these weird shapes would work that way. It looks horrible in all caps,” he said. “The joy for me was not making it right or perfect or straight.”
    
    Read: What letters look like
    
    Connare’s new letters weren’t used in the final version of Microsoft Bob; the company stuck with its original choice of Times New Roman. Still, Comic Sans escaped into the world. It appeared as an original option in Windows 95, if only because, unlike many other typefaces, Microsoft didn’t have to pay for it. Comic Sans proved immediately popular, predominantly because it didn’t look remotely like anything else—blatantly quirkier than Arial, Courier New, or any others in the then-limited drop-down menu.
    
    Comic Sans arrived at precisely the moment when computers became tools for personal expression rather than just dull workhorses, and users wanted fonts to match. The type was of its age: It met a singular need and then a popular demand, albeit an unintended, unsophisticated one. Typefaces are the clothes that words wear; fashion suits the times.
    
    “The magic is that people took to it on their own,” Tom Stephens, who worked alongside Connare in Microsoft’s typography unit when Comic Sans emerged, wrote in The Guardian. Before home computers and desktop publishing, font selection for posters and invitations was left to the professionals; Comic Sans ushered in the era of the amateur’s choice, for good or ill. “When you use Comic Sans, you’re making a statement: ‘I’m more relaxed, more creative. I may be working in this area, but this job does not define me,’” Stephens said. “It’s almost an anti-technology typeface.”
    
    And then the backlash began. People liked Comic Sans too much. It was being used everywhere, on everything—funeral announcements, museum display signs—as if fonts had just been invented and Comic Sans was the only choice. Hating Comic Sans became a meme of sorts. For this we must credit Dave and Holly Combs, a couple from Indianapolis who, in 2002, bonded over their dislike of Comic Sans’s overuse. Dave suggested that there was only one solution: It had to be banned. With a whiff of internet-age irony, he printed T-shirts, stickers, and mugs with a logo (“Comic Sans” encased within a red “No Entry” sign), and the public crusade against the typeface began.
    
    Read: The Comic Sans typewriter
    
    “The font wars are raging on the World Wide Web,” Canada’s National Post concluded in 2004. The same cycle has played out again and again: Comic Sans is perceived as a provocation, and social media takes the bait. In 2013, the retirement of Pope Benedict XVI was marked with a 62-page digital photo album commemorating his travels. The captions were in Comic Sans, leading to a Twitter storm. In 2019, John Dowd, a former lawyer for Donald Trump, issued a letter in Comic Sans explaining why documents requested during the first Trump impeachment inquiry would not be released. Again, Twitter storm. In 2022, Disney+ viewers discovered that they had the option of watching a program with captions in Comic Sans. Storm.
    
    An unexpected quality of Comic Sans, like the heroes in the comic books that inspired it, is its vulnerability, the sense that its fate could change at any moment. Even Dave and Holly Combs changed their mind about Comic Sans. Or at least Dave did. Holly still maintains that it’s an ugly font, but in 2019, Dave told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that he’d decided he didn’t want “anyone to be mean to anyone” anymore. He amended the message of the “Ban Comic Sans” campaign to “Use Comic Sans.” After a quarter century, the backlash seems to be winding down. The brave—or foolhardy—among us can even love to love it.
    
    But the future could hold an even better fate for the font: public opinion turning, not toward love but toward meh. In March 2023, The Face, a British culture magazine, did something extraordinary. All the text—the magazine’s name, its interview with the actor Halle Bailey, an article about the fashion designer Vivienne Westwood—was in a variation of Comic Sans. As The Face explained on its website, “Comic Sans always elicits a strong reaction. Whether that’s excitement or discomfort, we’ll leave up to you.” The issue’s designers added, “Feeling positive about Comic Sans could be seen as bad taste, while feeling negative about it could be interpreted as snobbery.” Two key factors define a great font, they wrote: It isn’t boring, and it has staying power. “Our least favorite typefaces are ones that provoke zero reactions.”
    
    But what was most remarkable about the magazine’s decision was how little commotion it caused. No storm. It quickly sold out its print run, but beyond a few reactions on TikTok, the social-media comments were about subject, not form—about Halle Bailey and Vivienne Westwood. Comic Sans was ironic. It was post-ironic. Nobody knew. Nobody really seemed to care much, either. After 30 years of trouble, perhaps Comic Sans can be just another font in the drop-down menu.
    
    This article has been adapted from Simon Garfield’s new book, Comic Sans: The Biography of a Typeface.
    
    • TheImpressiveX@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      27 days ago

      It’s just the vibe you gave off in the comments.

      I understand your concern about copyright laws and the ethics of copy-pasting a paywalled article, but this was not the right way to react. By removing comments containing the article, you created a Streisand effect, where attempts to censor information only end up making people more aware of said information. If you had just ignored the comment with the full article and acted like it was no big deal, people wouldn’t have felt the need to troll you about copyright, and perhaps they might have actually discussed the topic in the article, as more people would have been able to read it.

      But please don’t let this fiasco discourage you from making typography posts on Lemmy. We need more communities and engagement here. It seems you’re very passionate about this subject, and it would be a shame to see you leave. I’m sorry about the trolls from Hexbear, but again this wasn’t the right way to respond to this.

      Hopefully we can forgive and forget.

      • koavf@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        27 days ago

        I know why they did it. I’m just not going to be bullied by anti-social trolls who are here for the wrong reasons. And I’ll continue talking about typography because it’s fun and interesting. Thanks.

  • Chozo@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    28 days ago

    As he should. I think people forget that posting the full text of an article opens up the instance admins to legal issues. News articles are copyrighted; just because it’s easy to copy and paste doesn’t mean it’s legal to do so, and you put your instance at risk by doing it. The mod also doesn’t seem that angry; looks like maybe OP is adding their own spin here.

    Looks like the commenters are all just Hexbear trash being typical Hexbear trash. Just the standard “intellectual property doesn’t exist because I don’t like it” bullshit.

    • njm1314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      28 days ago

      What legal issues are you suggesting here? Where’s the precedent for that? Supreme Court case after Supreme Court case have shown that websites cannot be held accountable for the comments of its users. A plain text quoting of an article would be extremely hard to tie to the administrators website. Much less anybody.

      This is just an extremely panicky response that has no basis in reality.

      • Chozo@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        28 days ago

        Supreme Court case after Supreme Court case have shown that websites cannot be held accountable for the comments of its users.

        You’re thinking of Section 230, which doesn’t have a lot to do with copyright. This is more involving the DMCA.

      • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        28 days ago

        One endpoint it could wind up at would be some outlets starting to send DMCA takedown notices to Lemmy instances in the US. That wouldn’t be ideal, and it probably wouldn’t start stop once it started, however much anybody tried to put the horse back in the barn at that point.

        Edit: Words are hard

          • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            28 days ago

            Every so often I get reminded that Lemmy puts me talking with people who have no idea what they’re talking about, and are just confidently making random statements that line up with what they want to be true at that moment.

            Yes, Virginia, online news articles are copyrighted.