Thread: [Tuxpaint-stamps] Stamp reorganization
An award-winning drawing program for children of all ages
Brought to you by:
wkendrick
From: Bill K. <nb...@so...> - 2005-11-12 07:39:16
|
I've reorganized stamps! To folks with CVS access, please try to keep things in order. If you have any questions, please post here, or contact me directly. :^) The current heirarchy is simply based on what we have... e.g., there's no "Animals->Mammals->Dogs" since we have no dog stamps as of yet. In some cases, the main category contains some items (e.g., "Space" contains the Apollo lander), while in others it currently does not (e.g., in "Animals", everything's in a subcategory). Animals - Birds - Fish - Mammals + Cats + Monkeys - Insects Clothes - Hats Food - Fruit - Nuts - Vegetables - Dessert Hobbies Household - Dishes + Utensils - Tools - Art tools Natural forces People Plants - Flowers - Trees Seasonal - Christmas - Halloween - Hanukkah - New Years - Easter Space - Planets - Moon Sports Symbols - Faces - Math - Music - Shapes - Money + Euro - Coins + US - Coins + Canadian - Coins Town - Flags - Roadsigns - Houses Vehicles - Auto - Construction - Emergency - Flight + Planes - Military - Race Also, FYI, I've removed the gun from the stamps. Personally, it's not for me to dictate what kinds of things parents let their kids play with on the computer, however since there's currently no easy way of "opt'ing out" (without going in and manually deleting things), and numerous other folks have commented on that particular stamp, I've taken it out. As a kid, I played with Transformers and GI Joes and the like, and I realize many feel there's a place for such things in a kids' toy collection, but for the moment I'm trying to be as "P.C.[*] and generic" as possible. Once we have a better way (during installation and/or run-time) of letting parents/teachers/kids pick which stamps are available, and/or breaking the collection up into sub-collections as separate downloads, this won't be an issue. Note: I did keep the tank stamps in. Jets, tanks, aircraft carriers, etc. somehow seem less controversial. *shrug* -- -bill! bi...@ne... http://www.newbreedsoftware.com/ [*] Politically Correct |
From: Albert C. <aca...@gm...> - 2005-11-13 06:12:25
|
On 11/12/05, Bill Kendrick <nb...@so...> wrote: > Town > - Flags > - Roadsigns > - Houses > > Vehicles > - Auto > - Construction > - Emergency > - Flight > + Planes > - Military > - Race Maybe it is better to go by themes. Construction signs go with construction vehicles. Racetrack signs go with race cars. > Also, FYI, I've removed the gun from the stamps. Personally, it's not fo= r > me to dictate what kinds of things parents let their kids play with on th= e > computer, however since there's currently no easy way of "opt'ing out" > (without going in and manually deleting things), and numerous other folks > have commented on that particular stamp, I've taken it out. Who commented on it? What did they say? My kids loved that stamp, and I'm sure many other kids would love it too. It sounds like you would have loved it even. It's not as if you have jittery stockholders to worry about. Note: it was not a sawed-off shotgun. Lots and lots of kids have fathers and older brothers in the military. Many are serving in Iraq right now. BTW, we still don't have a tank AFAIK. We just have a Bradley. It only has a 30mm chain gun. A tank gun is 120mm, and much longer. |
From: Gabriel <gga...@in...> - 2005-11-13 13:35:18
|
I've personally not commented on it before, but now that the issue comes to= =20 attention, I'd like to say that I was shocked recently when I found that=20 military stamps were included in the standard stamp set. I really don't like this kind of stamps to be included by default in the=20 standard stamp package of TuxPaint. What's more, I have plans to offer TuxPaint to the school my son is going, = but=20 I know that school has a strong rule against all kinds of weapons at school= ,=20 so they will most certainly dislike the fact that this kind of stuff is=20 included within the program. I don't have any concerns, though, to have that kind of stamps in a separat= e=20 collection, so anyone who like to have them could do it. I'd like to stress I'm referring to all military stamps, not just "guns". cu Gabriel El S=E1bado 12 de Noviembre de 2005 22:51, Albert Cahalan escribi=F3: > Who commented on it? What did they say? > > My kids loved that stamp, and I'm sure many other kids would love > it too. It sounds like you would have loved it even. It's not as if you > have jittery stockholders to worry about. > > Note: it was not a sawed-off shotgun. Lots and lots of kids have fathers > and older brothers in the military. Many are serving in Iraq right now. > > BTW, we still don't have a tank AFAIK. We just have a Bradley. It only > has a 30mm chain gun. A tank gun is 120mm, and much longer. Conectese mas rapido y ahorre hasta un 50% Tel. 0909.2030 => $0,15 el minuto IVA incluido ______________________________________________________ http://www.internet.com.uy - En Uruguay somos internet |
From: Jeremie Z. <jz...@to...> - 2005-11-13 14:49:44
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Gabriel Gazz=E1n wrote: >=20 > I don't have any concerns, though, to have that kind of stamps in a sep= arate=20 > collection, so anyone who like to have them could do it. > I'd like to stress I'm referring to all military stamps, not just "guns= ". >=20 I completely agree with that comment. even the most fond of guns and war and whatever may admit that guns are not intended to be used by kids. i think it would be as shocking to see bottles of beer, joints, syringes, or why not girls with big boobs or whatever? the debate isn't about the role of the military, or patriotism, or colonisation war or anything else. it's just about what values are _internationally_ to be transmitted to kids. i hope this will be solved soon. jz - -- - --- Jeremie ZIMMERMANN --------------- http://tofz.org -- - --- Sauvons le Droit d'Auteur! ------- http://eucd.info -- - --- Recherche en Informatique Libre -- http://april.org -- - -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDd1KD1eTOPM/5+wsRArjGAJwIcXFKbK/St7Tj58rtrQl0OToywACgmWmv HofMgXAxBrbkLlvxueU3y9M=3D =3D5eaQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
From: Albert C. <aca...@gm...> - 2005-11-14 00:14:30
|
On 11/13/05, Jeremie ZIMMERMANN <jz...@to...> wrote: > even the most fond of guns and war and whatever may admit that guns are > not intended to be used by kids. i think it would be as shocking to see > bottles of beer, joints, syringes, or why not girls with big boobs or > whatever? Kids face syringes ALL THE TIME, even if the don't live in crummy neighborhoods. We certainly could use a syringe. Hint: doctor. None of the above is widely interesting for kids though. Kids just don't generally care about beer, joints, and boobs. You don't see the toy store selling toy beer bottles, but you sure do see the toy store selling toy guns. GI Joe still sells well. > the debate isn't about the role of the military, or patriotism, or > colonisation war or anything else. it's just about what values are > _internationally_ to be transmitted to kids. To keep things international and all, you're way off. Just about every home in Switzerland has a government-issue military rifle. (a so-called "assault rifle") Similar weapons are very common in Israel as well. One could argue that the AK-47 is more international I suppose. I certainly wouldn't mind having one. The kids would love it. Put the kids first. It's heartbreaking to see political correctness taking something away from kids. Shall we also remove all religeous symbols? How about this: we mark all possibly-disturbing stamps with an "interesting" keyword. We add a --pc option to hide them. |
From: Bill K. <nb...@so...> - 2005-11-14 07:21:17
|
On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 07:14:28PM -0500, Albert Cahalan wrote: > It's heartbreaking to see political correctness taking something > away from kids. Shall we also remove all religeous symbols? Well, my eventual idea is to split things up enough that parents can pick and choose _anything_ to install/not-install. (Either during the installation process, or by simply downloading just the bits they want.) So I'm not taking anything away (not in the long-run), I'm simply going to make everything available piecemeal. > How about this: we mark all possibly-disturbing stamps with > an "interesting" keyword. We add a --pc option to hide them. That's a thought, but in the end I don't want _us_ to be the decision-makers. For example, Xylian religious relics might be VERY politically-incorrect in Fakelandia, but anywhere else, nobody cares. -- -bill! bi...@ne... http://www.newbreedsoftware.com/ |
From: Kevin D. <ke...@do...> - 2005-11-14 15:57:20
|
On Monday 14 November 2005 00:14, Albert Cahalan wrote: > It's heartbreaking to see political correctness taking something > away from kids. Shall we also remove all religeous symbols? This has nothing to do with political correctness, which is a loaded term anyway. Some things are appropriate for a <8 app like Tuxpaint (ie promote a positive, hopeful, inclusive view of the world), and some aren't. If, as you say, "Kids just don't generally care about beer, joints, and boobs", why should they prompted to care about guns? In the two country examples you mention (neither of which are very representative in terms of their political history), I don't suppose that the weapons in question are offered to anyone other than adults. I have no problem whatsoever with religious symbols, provided there is no ban applied to which religions can be symbolised, and I don't see what religion has to do with weapons anyway (save that most religions prohibit killing, but have often been used by miscreants to justify killing). -- Pob hwyl / Best wishes Kevin Donnelly www.kyfieithu.co.uk - Meddalwedd Rhydd yn Gymraeg www.cymrux.org.uk - Linux Cymraeg ar un CD |
From: Albert C. <aca...@gm...> - 2005-11-15 03:33:09
|
On 11/14/05, Kevin Donnelly <ke...@do...> wrote: > On Monday 14 November 2005 00:14, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > It's heartbreaking to see political correctness taking something > > away from kids. Shall we also remove all religeous symbols? > > This has nothing to do with political correctness, which is a loaded term > anyway. Some things are appropriate for a <8 app like Tuxpaint (ie promo= te a > positive, hopeful, inclusive view of the world), and some aren't. That, right there, is political correctness. Tuxpaint shouldn't promote _any_ view of the world. It should offer everything that will interest a good number of kids. Otherwise: 1. What is "positive"? 2. What is "hopeful"? 3. Why is "inclusive" good, and what does it mean? Note that, by excluding things, you contradict yourself severely. This is the fundamental error of modern political correctness. Being more inclusive of military families would sure be appreciated. > If, as you > say, "Kids just don't generally care about beer, joints, and boobs", why > should they prompted to care about guns? This isn't prompting. This is simply providing stamps, without any requirement that they be used. Prompting would be if, at start-up, Tux suggested that you draw something with guns. Typical boys will care about guns of course, though most will know to feign horror if that makes the adults happy. > In the two country examples you > mention (neither of which are very representative in terms of their polit= ical > history), I don't suppose that the weapons in question are offered to any= one > other than adults. We also don't offer cars to anyone other than adults, but in the toy store you'll find both toy cars and toy guns. (the big killer is the car of course, by an extremely wide margin) Note that the toy store does not offer toy joints. Anything a toy store might sell should be acceptable. > I have no problem whatsoever with religious symbols, > provided there is no ban applied to which religions can be symbolised, an= d I > don't see what religion has to do with weapons anyway Both can "offend" people who like to be offended. They thus should get equal treatment. |
From: Bill K. <nb...@so...> - 2005-11-15 06:25:49
|
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 10:26:35PM -0500, Albert Cahalan wrote: > We also don't offer cars to anyone other than adults, but in the > toy store you'll find both toy cars and toy guns. (the big killer is > the car of course, by an extremely wide margin) Note that the > toy store does not offer toy joints. Well, I think the issue here is kind of like that of the VCR debates 25 years ago. What is the major purpose of the device (car, scissors, VCR, gun)? The problem here, though, is that a fighter jet would seem to be a less "shocking" image. However, its purpose is very similar to that of a gun. So a line-drawing decision needs to be made. <snip> > Both can "offend" people who like to be offended. They thus > should get equal treatment. This is kind of how I see it. Divide things up, let people decide what they want. -bill! |
From: Kevin D. <ke...@do...> - 2005-11-14 11:47:18
|
On Sunday 13 November 2005 14:35, Gabriel Gazz=E1n wrote: > I don't have any concerns, though, to have that kind of stamps in a > separate collection, so anyone who like to have them could do it. > I'd like to stress I'm referring to all military stamps, not just "guns". I agree with Gabriel - this doesn't really fit in with the Tuxpaint "brand"= ,=20 IMHO. I don't like censoring either, so the suggestion of an auxiliary=20 collection (not included as default) seems to meet both points. Whether Tuxpaint users have relatives serving in Iraq is irrelevant here,=20 since that is a whole other big question, on which opinions diverge widely.= =20 Here in the UK there is increasing concern about violence in schools (a=20 15-year old girl was stabbed in the eye with a pair of scissors by a 14-yea= r=20 old while standing in the canteen queue a couple of days ago), and there ha= ve=20 of course been several very sad events in US schools. I dislike the idea o= f=20 children having weapons images thrust in front of them yet again (they see= =20 enough in cartoons, news, games, ads, etc). =2D-=20 Pob hwyl / Best wishes Kevin Donnelly www.kyfieithu.co.uk - Meddalwedd Rhydd yn Gymraeg www.cymrux.org.uk - Linux Cymraeg ar un CD |
From: Albert C. <aca...@gm...> - 2005-11-15 03:03:31
|
On 11/14/05, Kevin Donnelly <ke...@do...> wrote: > Whether Tuxpaint users have relatives serving in Iraq is irrelevant here, > since that is a whole other big question, on which opinions diverge widel= y. I suppose the exact number of Tuxpaint users with such relatives might be a matter of opinion, but I hope you can agree that "lots" is a fact. > Here in the UK there is increasing concern about violence in schools (a > 15-year old girl was stabbed in the eye with a pair of scissors by a 14-y= ear How does that relate to anything? Uh... you think we should remove the scissors stamp? I've only ever heard of U.S. airport security objecting to a scissors, but OK, we should apply rules evenly. |
From: Gabriel <gga...@in...> - 2005-11-15 12:07:02
|
El Martes 15 de Noviembre de 2005 00:03, Albert Cahalan escribi=F3: > > Here in the UK there is increasing concern about violence in schools (a > > 15-year old girl was stabbed in the eye with a pair of scissors by a > > 14-year > > How does that relate to anything? Uh... you think we should remove > the scissors stamp? "Violence" is what should not be transmited through TuxPaint, I think. Be it a photo of a violent act or one of a weapon (which sole logical use i= s=20 in a context of violence). We could not go beyond this limit, even if we tried. You should always find a way to kill someone with a teddy bear if you're si= ck=20 enough, but the simple image of a teddy bear doesn't transmit that=20 possibility to the viewer. Just the opposite is what happens with weapons=20 (guns, tanks, fighters, so on... admitedly specially with guns and knifes). I know technology advanced gadgets attract people (including kids), but let= 's=20 find more astronaut/spaceships images, more ultra developed racing cars or= =20 even enormous working machines, such as bulldozers, mining trucks and the=20 like... And for the ones that prefer to have weapons or violence act photos as stam= ps,=20 of course, there could be a collection with those things to download also.= =20 Why not? cheers, Gabriel Conectese mas rapido y ahorre hasta un 50% Tel. 0909.2030 => $0,15 el minuto IVA incluido ______________________________________________________ http://www.internet.com.uy - En Uruguay somos internet |
From: Albert C. <aca...@gm...> - 2005-11-15 13:51:35
|
On 11/15/05, Gabriel Gazz=E1n <gga...@in...> wrote: > El Martes 15 de Noviembre de 2005 00:03, Albert Cahalan escribi=F3: > > > Here in the UK there is increasing concern about violence in schools = (a > > > 15-year old girl was stabbed in the eye with a pair of scissors by a > > > 14-year > > > > How does that relate to anything? Uh... you think we should remove > > the scissors stamp? > > "Violence" is what should not be transmited through TuxPaint, I think. > Be it a photo of a violent act or one of a weapon (which sole logical use= is > in a context of violence). I know many people with guns who do not use them for violence. Drop the prejudice please. One of these people is a civilian with a military-style gun that he just enjoys shooting. He shoots targets. Lots of people shoot vermin or hunt, which is only violence if you also have a thing against mouse traps or non-vegan food. Even violence isn't always bad. Consider a policeman. Kids all know that the police have real guns. Tuxpaint has a cop car. > I know technology advanced gadgets attract people (including kids), but l= et's > find more astronaut/spaceships images, more ultra developed racing cars o= r > even enormous working machines, such as bulldozers, mining trucks and the > like... Sure, though let's not have too many duplicates. Let's also have something to cover every interest that a kid is somewhat likely to have. > And for the ones that prefer to have weapons or violence act photos as st= amps, > of course, there could be a collection with those things to download also= . > Why not? I actually dislike the current split. For Windows and Mac I'd like to see: tuxpaint-light: only the program tuxpaint: everything (program+stamps) For the Linux packages that support dependencies, "tuxpaint" could just depend on "tuxpaint-light" to get the program. Today you can kind of get this on Linux, but the package names are wrong. You have to select "tuxpaint-stamps" instead of "tuxpaint", which is illogical. Splitting things up just makes things hard. I should be able to download one big file containing everything. |
From: Gabriel <gga...@in...> - 2005-11-15 15:46:14
|
El Martes 15 de Noviembre de 2005 10:51, Albert Cahalan escribi=F3: > I know many people with guns who do not use them for violence. > Drop the prejudice please. One of these people is a civilian with > a military-style gun that he just enjoys shooting. He shoots targets. Yeah, I also know a guy who uses teddy bears as weapons of mass destruction= ;) =20 but they are both exceptions, using the respective things for other purpose= s=20 than the main ones. It's clear that the reasons behind weapon development and market have clear= =20 identifications with human violence. It doesn't really matter if your=20 neighbour uses it as a flower vase... In my opinion it's what the thing represents what matters in this case. But, again, I think an optional package including this material should not= =20 hurt anyone. Gabriel Conectese mas rapido y ahorre hasta un 50% Tel. 0909.2030 => $0,15 el minuto IVA incluido ______________________________________________________ http://www.internet.com.uy - En Uruguay somos internet |
From: Bill K. <nb...@so...> - 2005-11-15 18:02:10
|
On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 08:51:29AM -0500, Albert Cahalan wrote: > For the Linux packages that support dependencies, "tuxpaint" could > just depend on "tuxpaint-light" to get the program. Today you can kind > of get this on Linux, but the package names are wrong. You have to > select "tuxpaint-stamps" instead of "tuxpaint", which is illogical. This is my naming convention, and I prefer it this way. Technically, on Linux distros (at least those that support multiple architectures), it should end up being: tuxpaint <-- the executable tuxpaint-data <-- the architecture-independent UI data (sounds, images) tuxpaint-stamps <-- the add-on stamps (not _required_ to use Tux Paint [*]) [*] Admittedly, more than one brush or font isn't _required_, either, but it's much cheaper to include a few dozen kilobytes of data to 'flesh out' the brush and text tools than it is to include all of our stamps... besides, the stamps will hopefully eventually break up into further sub-packages > Splitting things up just makes things hard. I should be able to download > one big file containing everything. Having one big file containing "everything" (Tux Paint itself, plus all stamps) does actually make sense. A number of shareware listing sites ask me to provide a single file for them to mirror, or a single file for them to link to (which locks it into a particular version on a particular sourceforge mirror or my own FTP site *sigh*). I think some magazines with CDs provide Tux Paint, but _NOT_ stamps, for some silly reason, too. I've received a number of emails from folks asking how they get the extra stamps. "Duh, you download them!" But, obviously, they didn't get Tux Paint from my website, otherwise they would have known that. -bill! -- -bill! bi...@ne... http://www.newbreedsoftware.com/ |
From: Kevin D. <ke...@do...> - 2005-11-16 08:59:49
|
On Tuesday 15 November 2005 03:03, Albert Cahalan wrote: > On 11/14/05, Kevin Donnelly <ke...@do...> wrote: > > Whether Tuxpaint users have relatives serving in Iraq is irrelevant here, > > since that is a whole other big question, on which opinions diverge > > widely. > > I suppose the exact number of Tuxpaint users with such relatives > might be a matter of opinion, but I hope you can agree that "lots" > is a fact. I would doubt that "fact", but the "big question" I was referring to is whether people should be in Iraq in the first place. But that is way OT. > > Here in the UK there is increasing concern about violence in schools (a > > 15-year old girl was stabbed in the eye with a pair of scissors by a > > 14-year > > How does that relate to anything? Uh... you think we should remove > the scissors stamp? I've only ever heard of U.S. airport security > objecting to a scissors, but OK, we should apply rules evenly. Er ... scissors -> violent use, guns -> even more violent use, therefore dubious?? At least scissors have a legitimate purpose (cutting paper) - what else can you use guns for? > > This has nothing to do with political correctness, which is a loaded term > > anyway. Some things are appropriate for a <8 app like Tuxpaint (ie > > promote a positive, hopeful, inclusive view of the world), and some > > aren't. > > Tuxpaint shouldn't promote _any_ view of the world. It should > offer everything that will interest a good number of kids. Then you may find some who do indeed have an interest in joints and well-endowed girls ... Seriously: > 1. What is "positive"? Er, believing that most people are basically good (a la Albert Camus), and that there is no apocalypse around the corner ... > 2. What is "hopeful"? Er, believing that most problems can be solved by working sympathetically with other people ... > 3. Why is "inclusive" good, and what does it mean? Er, not jumping to the conclusion that people with a different language, religion, worldview are up to no good, and should be approached with suspicion. I would be surprised if any teacher you approached did not feel that this was the sort of thing they try to inculcate into children - although dangers/exceptions can be dealt with in class, the overall view is surely a positive one. I doubt whether any teacher would consider having a class session on distinguishing various kinds of automatic weapons. But perhaps you would see this in itself as another example of "political correctness". > Being more inclusive of military families would sure be appreciated. Well, that is special pleading. You know perfectly well that even in wars where the cause was a lot more compelling, the acts of remembrance (we've just had one this Sunday in the UK) concentrate on the qualities of those involved - they do not expatiate on the weapons they were using. > > If, as you > > say, "Kids just don't generally care about beer, joints, and boobs", why > > should they prompted to care about guns? > > This isn't prompting. This is simply providing stamps, > without any requirement that they be used. Prompting > would be if, at start-up, Tux suggested that you draw > something with guns. Having them available implies that they are "normal". Guns are not normal, especially for children. > Typical boys will care about guns of course, though most > will know to feign horror if that makes the adults happy. Not true, I'm afraid. At least in this country, the number of young boys who play with toy guns must be fraction of what it was in my day. Unfortunately, the number of older boys who play with real guns has rocketed. Perhaps this is because they didn't play enough with toy guns when they were young ... or perhaps it is because they see guns being used all the time in films and TV serials, and think of them as a "normal" fashion accessory. Hmm - which is more likely, I wonder? > > In the two country examples you > > mention (neither of which are very representative in terms of their > > political history), I don't suppose that the weapons in question are > > offered to anyone other than adults. > > We also don't offer cars to anyone other than adults, but in the > toy store you'll find both toy cars and toy guns. (the big killer is > the car of course, by an extremely wide margin) Note that the > toy store does not offer toy joints. Possibly true in the US, if you squint at the figures in a certain way, but not here - car fatalities as a proportion of people owning cars will be a lot lower than gun fatalities as a proportion of people owning guns. > Anything a toy store might sell should be acceptable. Surely depends on the toy store ... > > I have no problem whatsoever with religious symbols, > > provided there is no ban applied to which religions can be symbolised, > > and I don't see what religion has to do with weapons anyway > > Both can "offend" people who like to be offended. They thus > should get equal treatment. Religion only offends people who are not "politically correct", as you put it - ie those who don't subscribe to the "positive, hopeful, inclusive" thing. So I'm being consistent here. This is now well OT, so I don't intend to reply to the list any more (although you are welcome to continue the discussion with me off-list if you like). No doubt Bill will find some way of dealing with this issue for the next release of Tuxpaint. -- Pob hwyl / Best wishes Kevin Donnelly www.kyfieithu.co.uk - Meddalwedd Rhydd yn Gymraeg www.cymrux.org.uk - Linux Cymraeg ar un CD |
From: Albert C. <aca...@gm...> - 2005-11-17 06:05:18
|
On 11/16/05, Kevin Donnelly <ke...@do...> wrote: > On Tuesday 15 November 2005 03:03, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > On 11/14/05, Kevin Donnelly <ke...@do...> wrote: > > > Here in the UK there is increasing concern about violence in schools = (a > > > 15-year old girl was stabbed in the eye with a pair of scissors by a > > > 14-year > > > > How does that relate to anything? Uh... you think we should remove > > the scissors stamp? I've only ever heard of U.S. airport security > > objecting to a scissors, but OK, we should apply rules evenly. > > Er ... scissors -> violent use, guns -> even more violent use, therefore > dubious?? At least scissors have a legitimate purpose (cutting paper) - = what > else can you use guns for? Note that legitimate purposes may be violent. Legitimate violent uses: home defence, military, police Legitimate non-violent uses: several Olympic sports, hunting > > Tuxpaint shouldn't promote _any_ view of the world. It should > > offer everything that will interest a good number of kids. > > Then you may find some who do indeed have an interest in joints and > well-endowed girls ... I won't find "a good number", excepting 17-year-old "kids". > Seriously: > > > 1. What is "positive"? > > Er, believing that most people are basically good (a la Albert Camus), an= d > that there is no apocalypse around the corner ... Cool. Basically good people use guns for lawful and/or ethical purposes. > > 2. What is "hopeful"? > > Er, believing that most problems can be solved by working sympathetically= with > other people ... Um, OK, the key word being "most". Whatever... > > 3. Why is "inclusive" good, and what does it mean? > > Er, not jumping to the conclusion that people with a different language, > religion, worldview are up to no good, and should be approached with > suspicion. Great. Don't jump to the conclusion that people who deal with guns in some way (use, ownership, toys, Tux Paint) are up to no good. > I would be surprised if any teacher you approached did not feel > that this was the sort of thing they try to inculcate into children Well, be surprised, because those are very Western ideals. I'd rather that Tux Paint just supplied a complete tool instead of pushing any ideology. > > Being more inclusive of military families would sure be appreciated. > > Well, that is special pleading. You know perfectly well that even in war= s > where the cause was a lot more compelling, the acts of remembrance (we've > just had one this Sunday in the UK) concentrate on the qualities of those > involved - they do not expatiate on the weapons they were using. I think I see the objection now. You seem to think this is about a particular current event that you dislike. Except for the general idea that current topics are of interest, I don't see it that way. Kids like to draw family members doing the things they do for a living. They also like to draw people in professions that are drawable. (not a stock broker for example) For many, the military is both. The U.S. had 1413577 active-duty soldiers in 2002, representing 1.3% of the population aged 18-49. That's a rather popular job. For a fireman, you need fire (got it) and a fire truck (none yet) and a few other things. For a cop you need a handgun, handcuffs, hat, car, radio, and maybe a club. For a doctor you need a syringe. :-) My brother reports that he spends a good deal of time with a rifle standing guard over something. So, for my kid to draw him doing what he does for a living EVEN IN PEACETIME, a military rifle is required. > Having them available implies that they are "normal". Guns are not norma= l, > especially for children. They are more normal than spacecraft! > > Typical boys will care about guns of course, though most > > will know to feign horror if that makes the adults happy. > > Not true, I'm afraid. At least in this country, the number of young boys= who > play with toy guns must be fraction of what it was in my day. Unfortunat= ely, > the number of older boys who play with real guns has rocketed. Perhaps t= his > is because they didn't play enough with toy guns when they were young ...= or > perhaps it is because they see guns being used all the time in films and = TV > serials, and think of them as a "normal" fashion accessory. Hmm - which = is > more likely, I wonder? Neither is likely to be related in any way. Various other social issues are at work. There was a time when moms stayed home, stayed married, and spanked kids who got out of line. The entertainment choices mainly involved real live human interaction too, so learning to socialize wasn't optional. People were more religious. Families were larger. Etc., etc. > > > I have no problem whatsoever with religious symbols, > > > provided there is no ban applied to which religions can be symbolised= , > > > and I don't see what religion has to do with weapons anyway > > > > Both can "offend" people who like to be offended. They thus > > should get equal treatment. > > Religion only offends people who are not "politically correct", as you pu= t it > - ie those who don't subscribe to the "positive, hopeful, inclusive" thin= g. > So I'm being consistent here. No, you're not being inclusive. You exclude at least one BIG occupation. > This is now well OT, so I don't intend to reply to the list any more (alt= hough > you are welcome to continue the discussion with me off-list if you like).= No > doubt Bill will find some way of dealing with this issue for the next rel= ease > of Tuxpaint. I hope you liked my earlier suggestion for dealing with the issue. The mailing list config makes off-list replies very awkward. |