Weird, there's an old picture on my money.AGS10TAK said:
My money is on an old picture.
Was that your house?MondayMorningQB said:
Which one of you has a drone?
rbcs_2 said:
I'm missing something. Why would we want the old signs up?
greg.w.h said:
The new signage shouldn't need improvement if infinitely better. Or your argumentation might simply be infinitely poor.
The two issues are contrast (large white letters on maroon v letters that mix maroon and white on gray) and color matching of the background. Neither was well considered and the excuse is to have it lit so it's more visible when it's darker.
I think the new design is a compromise in order to match a vision that never was going to work well and the school has a NASTY habit of taking criticism poorly and many Aggies defend the school when appropriately criticised.
It's okay to say "it's not that bad." It's not okay to claim "it's infinitely better." The latter seeks to dehumanize the opposing argument largely just to win the argument. If you cannot agree it's a compromise design you possibly aren't qualified to comment. That the school defends it is because they prefer the intent of the design which is to unify with bare concrete.
The real issue is the lack of the second deck scrap and rebuild causes all of the exposed concrete to look patchy so they were trying to unify the look by covering that section with a color that matched the new concrete. They're hiding a bad decision.
greg.w.h said:
The new signage shouldn't need improvement if infinitely better. Or your argumentation might simply be infinitely poor.
The two issues are contrast (large white letters on maroon v letters that mix maroon and white on gray) and color matching of the background. Neither was well considered and the excuse is to have it lit so it's more visible when it's darker.
I think the new design is a compromise in order to match a vision that never was going to work well and the school has a NASTY habit of taking criticism poorly and many Aggies defend the school when appropriately criticised.
It's okay to say "it's not that bad." It's not okay to claim "it's infinitely better." The latter seeks to dehumanize the opposing argument largely just to win the argument. If you cannot agree it's a compromise design you possibly aren't qualified to comment. That the school defends it is because they prefer the intent of the design which is to unify with bare concrete.
The real issue is the lack of the second deck scrap and rebuild causes all of the exposed concrete to look patchy so they were trying to unify the look by covering that section with a color that matched the new concrete. They're hiding a bad decision.
I can't imagine taking myself as seriously as you take yourself.greg.w.h said:
The new signage shouldn't need improvement if infinitely better. Or your argumentation might simply be infinitely poor.
The two issues are contrast (large white letters on maroon v letters that mix maroon and white on gray) and color matching of the background. Neither was well considered and the excuse is to have it lit so it's more visible when it's darker.
I think the new design is a compromise in order to match a vision that never was going to work well and the school has a NASTY habit of taking criticism poorly and many Aggies defend the school when appropriately criticised.
It's okay to say "it's not that bad." It's not okay to claim "it's infinitely better." The latter seeks to dehumanize the opposing argument largely just to win the argument. If you cannot agree it's a compromise design you possibly aren't qualified to comment. That the school defends it is because they prefer the intent of the design which is to unify with bare concrete.
The real issue is the lack of the second deck scrap and rebuild causes all of the exposed concrete to look patchy so they were trying to unify the look by covering that section with a color that matched the new concrete. They're hiding a bad decision.
El. Oh. El.Quote:
The latter seeks to dehumanize the opposing argument largely just to win the argument.
Meximan said:
I don't think greg understands what dehumanization means.
There was a strong and confident consensus among Ags who parked their conveyances at the Astin Terminal for the lsu game that the crap sign would be replaced during the summer.FriscoKid said:rbcs_2 said:
I'm missing something. Why would we want the old signs up?
Cause the new one looked like crap.
Yelnick McWawa said:
A) Critical thinking skills people. It's obviously an old picture.
B) It's embarrassing how many of you see stuff like this and draw conclusions like the OP. Same with obvious satirical material (Jimbo going by James, the 7 foot, 500 pound TE, etc.). Bunch of rubes!
C) The new signage looks infinitely better than the old one, they just need to complete the gun metal gray paneling to cover up the exposed concrete and find a way to make the lettering stand out a bit more during the day.
D) BTHOEveryone in 2019!
E) TGIF
I had to think about this one for a minute before deciphering your meaning that you hang out with rich guys who own aeroplanes and the lettering on the sign is for some reason important to them after attending one game. Did I get that right?Quote:
There was a strong and confident consensus among Ags who parked their conveyances at the Astin Terminal for the lsu game that the crap sign would be replaced during the summer.
Social Media Influencer said:I had to think about this one for a minute before deciphering your meaning that you hang out with rich guys who own aeroplanes and the lettering on the sign is for some reason important to them after attending one game. Did I get that right?Quote:
There was a strong and confident consensus among Ags who parked their conveyances at the Astin Terminal for the lsu game that the crap sign would be replaced during the summer.
I know reading and basic logic are difficult for you as evidenced by your pathetic posting history so I'll help you a bit....I'll even type extra slow.Lateralus Ag said:Yelnick McWawa said:
A) Critical thinking skills people. It's obviously an old picture.
B) It's embarrassing how many of you see stuff like this and draw conclusions like the OP. Same with obvious satirical material (Jimbo going by James, the 7 foot, 500 pound TE, etc.). Bunch of rubes!
C) The new signage looks infinitely better than the old one, they just need to complete the gun metal gray paneling to cover up the exposed concrete and find a way to make the lettering stand out a bit more during the day.
D) BTHOEveryone in 2019!
E) TGIF
So, cover up the grey concrete with grey lettering. Fantastic idea.
Rube.
Yelnick McWawa said:I know reading and basic logic are difficult for you as evidenced by your pathetic posting history so I'll help you a bit....I'll even type extra slow.Lateralus Ag said:Yelnick McWawa said:
A) Critical thinking skills people. It's obviously an old picture.
B) It's embarrassing how many of you see stuff like this and draw conclusions like the OP. Same with obvious satirical material (Jimbo going by James, the 7 foot, 500 pound TE, etc.). Bunch of rubes!
C) The new signage looks infinitely better than the old one, they just need to complete the gun metal gray paneling to cover up the exposed concrete and find a way to make the lettering stand out a bit more during the day.
D) BTHOEveryone in 2019!
E) TGIF
So, cover up the grey concrete with grey lettering. Fantastic idea.
Rube.
Go re-read item C. Read it slow, it's okay. Then pull your head from your rectum and understand that those letters and words convey the opinion that the grey paneling needs to be continued to cover the exposed concrete. No one is discussing making the lettering grey, dummy.
You are absolutely insufferable.
Lateralus Ag said:
And you literally suggested "completing" the letters in grey.
Moron.