What a sad reply to a useful site! The all-capsness of "NO national parks, NO..." etc. presumes that this specific list of designations are necessary for a hike to have value. If you had only remembered the Appalachian Trail, maybe your perspective would have shifted. And as others have pointed out, hiking in CT (and really all of New England) is quite varied, beautiful and accessible . Perhaps you should come try it sometime, it may change your view!
They are certainly similar, but if you're choosing Peanuts as your main example of a comic strip that reuses some standard formatting... you're forgetting that in addition to the art, there's also decades of character and world building. Of course memes serve a similar function in terms of a multiple panel joke structure but there's a profound difference between those two at a core level. Maybe not so much with a Garfield or Beetle Bailey, though!
The word "them" has been used for centuries in cases where the writer may want to refer to a subject, or subjects, of no specific gender. I wonder why it's suddenly bothering you.
I think the parent’s point was that “them” is referring to a group that is “other than normal”, and that that should raise caution.
(Not agreeing or disagreeing, simply trying to infer the meaning.)
I suspect the person you are responding to is suggesting that these culture war issues are merely meant to distract from the real problem, which is wealth inequality. Many of the people worried about 'moral fabric' are fine with divorce and sexual assault (and will vote for politicians with these compromised moral values) but are also concerned about trans athletes who by most metrics comprise less that .01% of all athletes.
Had a family member who has said he cares NOTHING for sports - they bore him to tears - make several posts on FBook about the "horrible injustice" being perpetrated on female athletes. It's clear where he got his talking points from (Fox, etc)
There's a difference between "I don't like this thing that you're legally allowed to do and I think it should be illegal" and "these people possibly participated in illegal activities with trafficked minors".
> What about all the recent drama over the Epstein list, which comprise less than 0.01% of Americans?
Your math is way off. Epstein's list contains compromised people on positions of power who decide policy affecting 99% of Americans plus a lot of people around the world.
Compromised politicians, scientists and media figures can be used against the interests of more than 100% of Americans if we include wars and the damage done to foreigners.
Your opinion isn't popular, but I agree with you. Taking just the first image as an example... this is a digital recreation/modification of a Saul Steinberg cover for the New Yorker originally done in 1976. This cover created a extremely popular subgenre of stylized map drawing at the time, but the Mac version looks like mostly clip art images all splodged together with no real sense of composition or perspective. There are many other examples in here which I feel were made by people who happened to have access to the technology, but did not necessarily have great artistic ability.
That being said, although there are also some extremely good examples in here (in my subjective opinion), I absolutely think there is a nostalgia element at play. I worked on these machines in the 80s and feel that nostalgia myself.
That is interesting, although the originals are more convincing! Not least because (as you point out) the grain and blur of the original photos aren't matched.
This is exactly why Terry Gilliam named his production company Poo Poo Pictures. He liked the idea of studio executives having to ask their assistants "Did the Poo Poo memo come in yet?"
