Hello there ..... peek-a-boo .... guess who this is. Sorry, but I just can't get around to replying so quickly. On the other hand, perhaps I should be apologizing for answering at all.
>I didn't raise the issue of your bad spelling initially. If you want to know what the original point was, reread the post, and if you still have any questions on it, address them to the author of that post.
That's how I found out I couldn't see before Post 31.
>I do find it incongruous that one who professes to be concerned about the flouting of one grammatical convention doesn't take more care with their own grammar, ....
But that is comparing my forum grammar with finished art grammar is it not?
>I do think that any written matter that is full of spelling mistakes shows a lack of respect by the author for their audience, ....
I still find it difficult to see my posts as being *that* full of spelling mistakes.
>(just as I would find it hard to take seriously someone who was trying to explain quadratric equations to me if they'd first told me that 1 + 1 = 11).
Well, do you know what? I think that's the first time you've brought a smile to my face .... excellent (although I'm not sure you meant it to).
>Let's see if I can't clear this one up too, then (though I'm not hopeful):
You were right not to be hopeful Dominic, sorry, but I'm still lost with that one. I must be missing something fundamental here perhaps. I'd give up if I were you, I may be just a hopeless case.
>To me, this is a spectacular non sequitur ....
Sequitur! That's a gardening tool isn't it? Host, I think I've just been insulted but I can't find it in the dictionary :)
As I stated I think this needs another thread. The meaning of 'design' and 'art' I don't see as that clear cut and if we bring that into the discussion aswell we'll be here till the 2012 Olympics. Also I don't think there is a need because I reckon in general for the purposes of this discussion you could replace the word 'art' in my posts with 'design' and the point would still be made. For instance:-
>But in post 61, you wrote "there is a limitation to bending the rules for art's sake, and *that* is what this thread is supposed to be about". So, isn't figuring out what you mean by "art" central to what you say the thread is "supposed to be about"?
Good try, but I think if instead I had typed "there is a limitation to bending the rules for *design's* sake,", the point would still be valid.
>Because we were discussing designers' use of lowercase in logos.
Well, fair enough in that case, but as far as this discussion goes, is it necessary to draw a line between art and design?
>The impression it gives to you may be that, but can you not understand that you are probably not their target market and it doesn't give that impression to others? I really don't see how you can call yourself a designer if you don't understand this concept.
Well, I should be their target market because I have a car and I also restore cars as a hobby (in case you don't know, Halfords sell products for cars, and bicycles). You see, my argument is that this use of lower case for proper names may have some rare, very rare, times when it actually makes sense, but on the whole I think this myriad use of the effect has no sense to it other than fashion.
>Notwithstanding that, as I've said before, you should expect threads like this to wander. Otherwise, we're just left with a thread where Richard Archer-Jones says "I don't like the use of lowercase for proper nouns in logos", Heather says she agrees, and Herb, Thomas, and I say we don't agree. And that would be the end of the thread.
Well, that's a fair point if I had loads of time to discuss this and I didn't think we were boring the socks off other people on this board, but just like my views on art and design, it comes down to limitations and going too far off the subject.
>I'm floored! You spend all this time castigating designers for using lowercase when you have such a flawed understanding of correct capitalization yourself.
Ekky thump Dominic, that's rather harsh isn't it? Am I expected to know every rule regarding the proper use of capitals? (I'm still sure I've seen somewhere there was an exception in some uses of the word but some of my saved web pages on the subject don't exist anymore .... perhaps because they were wrong). Anyway, this is also not the point. As I've stated above, the point is not my knowledge of English grammar (whether or not my grammar is perfect on a forum), but whether I would deliberately use bad grammar in a finished work of art, or design.
>And I'm still waiting for you to tell me what all those questions that I haven't answered are.
What I meant by that politician comparison was when we get onto other subjects like me missing out the word 'most' and tending to imply that you actually *have* used bad grammar as opposed to *advocating* it, and hence getting away from the original question. (I can't see before post 38 now, so I'm having problems researching for this).
>..... but I do believe that it is the cost of the Olympics logo, not the lowercase, that is your real motivation in criticizing it.
Naaa .... I'm not that kind of person. I wouldn't complain about one subject by complaining about another ...... although I do wish your PC would break down :)
So, there you go Dominic, sort that lot out! I can't find the time to answer as quickly as you so you'll have to have patience with me. I don't think I should be typing posts this long. I mean, gee whiz, look at the length of it! There should be a law agin it (against it). I might have to restrict myself to just answering one thing at a time in future.
130
Replies
AdChoices