Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Font Identification - What font is this?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by B View Post
    further explanation would be both remedial and redundant.
    Yeah, because you don’t consider my reasoning at all, don’t answer my clarification questions properly, twist my words, try to discredit me on a personal level …and refuse to differentiate between fact and opinion and declare everything(!) an opinion. Which is of course wrong, but its a classic rhetoric trick. If anything is an opinion, you can’t be wrong, can you? So this trick is likely to be used, when people are exposed to be wrong or to use arguments that aren’’t sound/valid. It’s funny, I just wrote an extensive article about just this typical forum behavior some weeks ago. Not in English unfortunately.

    – Whether or not “fonts” are used is not an opinion as I said 3 times now.
    –The mentioned common usage of words (as it can be looked up in the dictionaries!) is not an opinion
    –The mentioned differences between metal type and digital type are not an opinion
    I could go on.

    If we can’t even point to reality (i.e. what is factually correct) as a common ground, then this discussion is certainly useless.
    Last edited by typoguru; 09-29-2017, 02:21 AM.

    Comment


    • #17
      From good old webster:

      Definition of font
      an assortment or set of type or characters all of one style and sometimes one size


      Definition of typeface
      all type of a single design

      The difference is subtle, but there.

      ''Common usage'' does not make a thing correct, I'm sorry to say. If I wrote body copy for my clients the way that I actually talk in person, not only would it be ungrammatical, it would likely get me fired.

      Devolving, or de-evolution, or dumbing-down, whatever you want to call it...I don't care. As long as whatever is in your files prints, I'll have a nice day and you can go on down your road of bliss as well.
      Last edited by PrintDriver; 09-29-2017, 07:36 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by typoguru View Post

        Yeah, because you don’t consider my reasoning at all, don’t answer my clarification questions properly, twist my words, try to discredit me on a personal level …and refuse to differentiate between fact and opinion and declare everything(!) an opinion. Which is of course wrong, but its a classic rhetoric trick. If anything is an opinion, you can’t be wrong, can you? So this trick is likely to be used, when people are exposed to be wrong or to use arguments that aren’’t sound/valid. It’s funny, I just wrote an extensive article about just this typical forum behavior some weeks ago. Not in English unfortunately.

        – Whether or not “fonts” are used is not an opinion as I said 3 times now.
        –The mentioned common usage of words (as it can be looked up in the dictionaries!) is not an opinion
        –The mentioned differences between metal type and digital type are not an opinion
        I could go on.

        If we can’t even point to reality (i.e. what is factually correct) as a common ground, then this discussion is certainly useless.

        Here's quick point-by-point refutation.
        • I did consider your reasoning and responded to what I thought warranted a response.
        • I had already gone over in earlier posts what you asked me to rehashed, hence my reference to redundancy and remedialism.
        • I did not twist your words.
        • You being German and lecturing me over words in my native language is a legitimate observation. If you view that as discreditation, fine. Your English, however, is certainly better than my German.
        • I do not fail to differentiate between fact and opinion on, as you put it, "everything." My opinion, however, is that your definitions of the words font and typeface are just your opinions.
        • I have engaged in no rhetorical fallacies and have made no attempts to trick you. However, arguments that increasingly hinge on accusing another of doing so is a common response to a failing argument.
        • You can claim your personal definition of words to be facts 3 or 3,000 times; it doesn't matter. Your "facts" on this subject are still just your opinions.
        • PrintDriver already referenced the most common English dictionary definition of those words as they relate to typography, which agree with my own.
        • I said nothing about the differences between metal and digital type being an opinion. For that matter I specifically mentioned those differences as being likely reasons behind the blurring of the terminology we've been discussing.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by B View Post
          My opinion, however, is that your definitions of the words font and typeface are just your opinions.
          You can claim your personal definition of words to be facts 3 or 3,000 times; it doesn't matter. Your "facts" on this subject are still just your opinions.
          That’s almost funny! I did not define those terms in any of my posts! Yet, not only do you claim I did, you even judge those purely imaginary definitions (as only opinions). No logical fallacies you say? Well that one is the classic straw man!

          Originally posted by B View Post
          I did not twist your words. I do not fail to differentiate between fact and opinion on …
          Of course you do, as it is most obvious with this “Your Facts Are Just Opinions” thing, which you repeat over and over again now, even though it is just absurd, when people actually check out what I said. I challenge you: Quote any sentence where I claimed a fact and then tell us why I is not a fact. That should be easy, if it were true, shouldn’t it? Yet, somehow you don’t go there. You just twist my words by claiming I would declare my opinions as facts. Which I never did. I just read it all again. The only fact I actually claimed was that the sample in the first post was created using a font (by any definition). From that point on you misrepresented that reference to a fact and blew it out of proportions more and more with every new comment, going so far as to claim it would represent all I would say “on the subject”. And with that you deliberately and dishonestly misrepresenting what I say.

          From good old webster:

          The difference is subtle, but there.
          Yes, of course. Who was that directed at? Me? Did I say anything different? Did I say anywhere that font and typeface should not have different meanings? That is not my position at all. As I told B: Go by what I actually say and don’t just assume my position just because I challenge certain points in your position.
          Last edited by typoguru; 09-29-2017, 01:42 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Don't feed it, B.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by PrintDriver View Post
              Don't feed it, B.
              A new low in this conversation. Now I am not even human anymore? I am “it”? So insults instead of arguments? Just reflect for a second what you just did there. Would you do the same if we would stand face to face? Would you call me “it” then or anyone else? How would you react if people would treat you this way?

              You guys can’t have your thinking challenged apparently, when all you come back with is insults and twisting every sentence of every reply that looks like it doesn’t agree with you.
              But you win. I won’t waste your or my time any longer here, when a proper and fruitful debate is clearly not possible with the most active users of this forum. I signed up here for typography, not for insults. Logging off.

              Comment


              • #22
                ...
                Shop smart. Shop S-Mart.

                Comment

                Search

                Collapse

                Sponsor

                Collapse

                Incredible Stock

                Latest Topics

                Collapse

                GDF A division of Mediabistro Holdings Adweek | Mediabistro | Clio | Film Expo Group Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy Copyright © 2016 Mediabistro Holdings
                Working...
                X