A New Twist on LawDog's Cake
- Thread starter sigcurious
- Start date
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
Nicely done but the ending seems out of place. Particularly the "hand written", I'll say, text at the end.
Technosavant
New member
Tom, it's the internet. Everything gets put into pictures. The only thing that surprises me is they didn't put Grumpy Cat into it somewhere.
It's an amusing graphic, and for the tl;dr crowd it might get more of a reading than a wall of text.
It's an amusing graphic, and for the tl;dr crowd it might get more of a reading than a wall of text.
dakota.potts
New member
Tom, I found it because a friend linked it on Facebook. I'm sure the memetic nature of the images (and their references to other pop culture) helped the spreadability of the text. Lots of people are noticing it.
The whole "TL;DR" thing annoys me to no end. I first encountered in on Reddit when I was asked to do a layman's explanation on the McDonald decision. I wrote a concise, bulleted explanation of the salient points. It took three paragraphs.
The first guy to respond wrote, "TL;DR: we didn't get class 3 repealed." Yeesh.
Some things are worth reading in their entirety, and a great deal of meaning and context gets lost with the Cliff's Notes mentality. Are we going to have TL;DR Lord of the Rings, in which the guy goes on a long walk and drops a ring in a volcano? Beethoven's TL;DR 5th Symphony, which is 4 notes and 3 seconds long?
The mentality will flourish if we cater to it.
[For those who don't know, "TL;DR" stands for "too long; didn't read."]
sigcurious
New member
I think this touches on a critical aspect of reaching the uninformed and undecided. It seems to be often said when discussions of how to broach 2A topics with the uninformed and/or undecided that how the message is communicated is just as critical as the message. (no preaching to the choir type approaches etc) I can certainly lament the increasingly short attention spans of the general public, but for better or worse this is the world in which we currently live. Those who would further limit our rights have mastered the sound bite and disseminating information with mass appeal. It seems to me at least, that people are already in sound bite/short information mode, and it's already flourished. They won't be reached by an attempt to simultaneously have them deal with information in a non-preferred format and where the information itself has very vocal supporters on both sides.
I think a critical part of conveying a message like this is to get someone thinking about a small part of the big picture, and allow them to seek out more information on their own at their own rate. Like many subjects, gun rights to be properly explained would take hours and hours(and hours and hours more depending on their history knowledge level). So while the full text(s) of LawDog might be be suitable for some, things like this can reach more people. Plus I personally think the humorous effect of the illustrations bring a positive note to the message, allowing for a positive association with the material and bringing a lightheartedness to what is inherently an adversarial subject.
When I joined the Marine Corps infantry I was 17 and the government put pistols, rifles, shotguns, machineguns, grenade launchers, and all manner of explosives in my hands - and trained me to use all of them.
I’m still the same guy – just much older and more mature - and since then have never broken any laws, never taken illicit drugs, and paid all taxes required of me.
But if I want a shotgun or pistol now it has to meet some “sporting purposes” rule because of the GCA. If I want a rifle it has to comply with some rule about imported parts. If I want a machinegun it has to be registered under rules of the NFA. Explosives? - Forget about it.
If you want to be reasonable about this let’s change the rules to allow me to do what I did at 17. Heck, I’ll even pay for them this time.
That’s my idea of reasonable restrictions.
I’m still the same guy – just much older and more mature - and since then have never broken any laws, never taken illicit drugs, and paid all taxes required of me.
But if I want a shotgun or pistol now it has to meet some “sporting purposes” rule because of the GCA. If I want a rifle it has to comply with some rule about imported parts. If I want a machinegun it has to be registered under rules of the NFA. Explosives? - Forget about it.
If you want to be reasonable about this let’s change the rules to allow me to do what I did at 17. Heck, I’ll even pay for them this time.
That’s my idea of reasonable restrictions.
dogtown tom
New member
TL;DR:
Can anyone summarize?
Brian Pfleuger
Moderator Emeritus
TL;DR:
Can anyone summarize?
Don't throw your cake in a volcano, I guess. I was speed reading so that might not be quite right.
Something about McDonald's, jewelry and volcanos.
Tell me that we should present our message in a clear and concise way, and I'm all for it. That's why we work on our opening statements in debates and articles. However, if we shorten it and dumb it down enough, the majority of the readership will digest the soundbite without looking for clarification or information.
That's why I hear gun owners yelling slogans they don't understand and being unable to elaborate to a general audience.
SPEMack618
New member
Tom and Brian with a sense of humor? I must have missed something in all those walls of cake text.
I generally like the cake explanation and certainly it's mention of the '34 NFA, however, I find it alienates people who are in favor of the whole no guns for convicted felon mindset.
Which then brings up the restoration of rights and whatnot that degenerates into a levy of complaints with the current working of our judicial system, and then, well, I just sort to want to throw myself in a volcano.
I generally like the cake explanation and certainly it's mention of the '34 NFA, however, I find it alienates people who are in favor of the whole no guns for convicted felon mindset.
Which then brings up the restoration of rights and whatnot that degenerates into a levy of complaints with the current working of our judicial system, and then, well, I just sort to want to throw myself in a volcano.
the neo socialist left in this country doesnt care about our rights. all they want is there agenda to get through.
You forget, these rich billionaires and politicians telling us we dont need guns to hunt, or protect ourselves have how shall we say
military level armed bodyguards with toys that normal citizens cant get unless they enlist in the army or marines.
You forget, these rich billionaires and politicians telling us we dont need guns to hunt, or protect ourselves have how shall we say
military level armed bodyguards with toys that normal citizens cant get unless they enlist in the army or marines.
sigcurious
New member
I should clarify, I do not think this is an appropriate format for all situations, particularly something more formal such as an article or debate, and I agree with the general premise that over-simplification can lead to confusion or a different form of glossing over due to brevity. However, I still think things like this can serve as a useful tool, particularly in less formal situations of the curious co-worker, friend, acquaintance etc type. Something like this can present a bit of information in an approachable way without being overbearing. Something to get a foot in the door, hopefully with an open mind on the other side of the threshold.