|
Post by chengling on Feb 11, 2007 14:48:59 GMT -5
Well, it has that rosy shade of red, plus the font is very flowery and ornate, like the kind you'd see on a Valentine's Day card.
|
|
|
Post by jonnyomega on Feb 11, 2007 14:54:35 GMT -5
BK's is red.
Plus I could argue that Vanna's doesn't cover the bloody part.
Six of one, half a dozen of the other to be honest.
|
|
|
Post by chengling on Feb 11, 2007 15:05:11 GMT -5
Blood red isn't the same as rosy red, and the blood isn't the predominant color in BK's poster.
|
|
|
Post by jonnyomega on Feb 11, 2007 15:07:55 GMT -5
That doesn't change the fact that Vanna's has no reference to Bloody.
And Red is the predominant colour since white isn't a colour.
|
|
|
Post by scrawn on Feb 11, 2007 15:10:33 GMT -5
I think it's meant to represent blood more than Valentine's day tbh.
|
|
|
Post by chengling on Feb 11, 2007 15:19:38 GMT -5
Of course white is a color, there were crayons made in white; therefore, it's a color.
And I happen to think the Valentine's theme should be predominant over the Blood just because you can have a Bloody theme anytime, but Valentine's Day only comes in February.
|
|
|
Post by jonnyomega on Feb 11, 2007 15:22:34 GMT -5
They make black crayons. That doesn't make black a colour.
If you were pushing for a Valentine's reference then BK could try to integrate a heart shape in the blood. Perhaps having the blood flow creating a white heart in amongst the red.
|
|
|
Post by chengling on Feb 11, 2007 15:25:02 GMT -5
Actually white is all the colors put together while black is an absence of color.
But I'd like to see that idea put into action, jonneh.
|
|
|
Post by jonnyomega on Feb 11, 2007 15:27:44 GMT -5
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WhiteNot important but I was pretty sure white isn't a colour. The first line proves my fact whilst confirming what you said.
|
|
|
Post by scrawn on Feb 11, 2007 15:43:55 GMT -5
I've been here for 2 1/2 years and seen many an argument. But I can safely say this is the most pointless argument I've seen.
|
|
|
Post by chengling on Feb 11, 2007 15:46:28 GMT -5
I don't think many physicists would agree with your evaluation of this dispute Dan.
|
|
|
Post by scrawn on Feb 11, 2007 15:47:23 GMT -5
And that's why I > them
|
|
|
Post by jonnyomega on Feb 11, 2007 15:47:53 GMT -5
I've been here for 2 1/2 years and seen many an argument. But I can safely say this is the most pointless argument I've seen. Your face is pointless And this isn't an argument. There is no legitimate beef between Michael and myself and we're having a topical discussion about a poster and our preferences.
|
|
|
Post by chengling on Feb 11, 2007 15:53:02 GMT -5
Gee, on the one hand we have a guy who listens to Good Charlotte at full blast while spending his entire day trying to make sure exactly 5 strands of his hair fall across his right eye at a 40 degree angle, and on the other hand we have people who go to painstaking lengths to explain the inner workings of the world at their most basic level.
Which is greater in your opinion?
|
|
|
Post by scrawn on Feb 11, 2007 16:01:18 GMT -5
I wasn't even being serious. But if you're after an argument... It's a bit ironic you saying I listen to Good Charlotte when you listen to Westlife, whose lyrics are just as 'emo' as Charlotte. I don't even listen to Good Charlotte, I'd struggle to name one song. Also the only reason I did my hair like I did because I could not be arsed going to barber's every 3 weeks. Besides, I don't even style my hair what you would consider "emo". Aaaaand I wasn't saying your argument over these posters were pointless, I was saying your argument over the colour "white" was pointless.
|
|