Why a game convention though? Does the gaming industry use any oil?
It's about getting the message out and being disruptive. Standing on a street corner with a sign does nothing as the news ignores you.
But disrupting a major event/traffic or attempting to destroy a priced piece of art with soup out of all things makes you and your organisation look like a massive pile of shit there are way way way better ways of protesting such as picketing as you said or rallys if you bring enough people say 200 or 300 you'll appear on the social media and prehaps local and regional news prehaps if you make a large enough splash you might sway the general public to your cause
You don't. Protests happen all the time in the hundreds. How many have you heard of? I haven't heard of any unless it gets violent. Unions strikes are disruptive so you hear about them. Cost of living marches walking past government buildings or protesting outside of them? Nothing.
Want to know the last march I heard about that was large and non disruptive? It was on a Youtube video. The youtubers didn't even know it was happening.
Blocking a road is boring now so isn't being reported as much, disrupting a gaming tournament gets news.
Rallies help don't get me wrong but they are often ignored. The disruptive, novel protests get news coverage.
plenty of protests have happened through history. Some have been more successful than examples being Marton Luther Kings rallies woman suffrage movements the salt march singing revolution plus with the world of the Internet if you make a large enough rucus you'll have eyes and ears on you from across the world
Okay lets take the civil rights movement. Incredibly disruptive and even violent at times, albeit usually in response to violence. Rosa Parks for example sat on the front of a bus and got arrested. She didn't move. She stopped a bus and all the passengers on the bus until she was arrested, nobody critisises her because some people were late that day!
Highschollers trying to desegregate school needed armed guards to just get in the building. They didn't go "dang! Best hold up a sign outside, don't want to stop others learning"
Many performed sit-ins. Sit-ins take up space and make it hard for others to use the space for its intended purpose.
They were very disruptive and people hated them for it. It wasn't only speeches and marches.
Women sufferage involved arson, women learning martial arts and beating people up, vandalism, and sex boycots, once again not just speeches and marches.
But pwease pwotest quieter! We twying to be ignowant in peace!
Rosa Parks for example sat on the front of a bus and got arrested. She didn’t move. She stopped a bus and all the passengers on the bus until she was arrested, nobody critisises her because some people were late that day!
I think a lot of people tend to look at Rosa Parks' act through a modern lens and say, "she wasn't disruptive, she was just sitting there," not realising that it was incredibly disruptive at the time. What she did seems like nothing by today's standards because her protest worked.
Women sufferage
Martyrs, too. Emily Davison threw herself in front of a horse race and died for it in the name of women's suffrage. There's debate about whether she intended to die, or whether she may have just been trying to attach suffragette colours to the King's horse, but the fact is that she was consciously willing to die for her cause. Plus she went on hunger strike in prison to the point where she was force-fed on multiple occasions.
Suffragettes going on hunger strike in prison, and the prison authorities violently force-feeding them to the point where they sustained fairly serious injuries, was common in the early 1910s. It's not particularly pleasant reading, but there's an article from the Museum Of London that talks about some of the lengths suffragettes went to with their hunger strikes that is worth reading for anyone who isn't familiar.
I think everyone should learn about the suffrage movement and the lengths they were willing to go to to fight for women's rights, particularly with civil protest being a somewhat relevant topic over the last few years.
When did anyone destroy art with soup?
Just Stop Oil threw soup on artwork in a museum. It wasn't destroyed all the souped art had protective glass shields and they knew that which is why they did it. Basically just made a mess that you can clean up with a cloth and mop.
They've souped quite a few artworks before.
Well that's the opposite of an answer to my question, it's an example of a time they didn't destroy art with soup
Attempted to destroy art with soup read into it if you want to it's van goths sunflower painting thankfully the morons didn't account for the painting being protected by some protective glass
They knew full well that the glass was there, which is why they did it to that painting. What makes you think they're morons???
Hey, while we're talking about it, why do we seem to care so much about a painting that wasn't damaged, but we don't seem to put nearly as much effort into hating on the people and companies that are actually destroying the world we live on?
Because “we” is an idiot who doesn’t understand what they are talking about but want to appear as if they do.
I'm genuinely trying to understand what information you're using to come to the conclusion that they're an idiot
Why a game convention though? Does the gaming industry use any oil?
It's about getting the message out and being disruptive. Standing on a street corner with a sign does nothing as the news ignores you.
But disrupting a major event/traffic or attempting to destroy a priced piece of art with soup out of all things makes you and your organisation look like a massive pile of shit there are way way way better ways of protesting such as picketing as you said or rallys if you bring enough people say 200 or 300 you'll appear on the social media and prehaps local and regional news prehaps if you make a large enough splash you might sway the general public to your cause
You don't. Protests happen all the time in the hundreds. How many have you heard of? I haven't heard of any unless it gets violent. Unions strikes are disruptive so you hear about them. Cost of living marches walking past government buildings or protesting outside of them? Nothing.
Want to know the last march I heard about that was large and non disruptive? It was on a Youtube video. The youtubers didn't even know it was happening.
Blocking a road is boring now so isn't being reported as much, disrupting a gaming tournament gets news.
Rallies help don't get me wrong but they are often ignored. The disruptive, novel protests get news coverage.
plenty of protests have happened through history. Some have been more successful than examples being Marton Luther Kings rallies woman suffrage movements the salt march singing revolution plus with the world of the Internet if you make a large enough rucus you'll have eyes and ears on you from across the world
Okay lets take the civil rights movement. Incredibly disruptive and even violent at times, albeit usually in response to violence. Rosa Parks for example sat on the front of a bus and got arrested. She didn't move. She stopped a bus and all the passengers on the bus until she was arrested, nobody critisises her because some people were late that day!
Highschollers trying to desegregate school needed armed guards to just get in the building. They didn't go "dang! Best hold up a sign outside, don't want to stop others learning"
Many performed sit-ins. Sit-ins take up space and make it hard for others to use the space for its intended purpose.
They were very disruptive and people hated them for it. It wasn't only speeches and marches.
Women sufferage involved arson, women learning martial arts and beating people up, vandalism, and sex boycots, once again not just speeches and marches.
But pwease pwotest quieter! We twying to be ignowant in peace!
I think a lot of people tend to look at Rosa Parks' act through a modern lens and say, "she wasn't disruptive, she was just sitting there," not realising that it was incredibly disruptive at the time. What she did seems like nothing by today's standards because her protest worked.
Martyrs, too. Emily Davison threw herself in front of a horse race and died for it in the name of women's suffrage. There's debate about whether she intended to die, or whether she may have just been trying to attach suffragette colours to the King's horse, but the fact is that she was consciously willing to die for her cause. Plus she went on hunger strike in prison to the point where she was force-fed on multiple occasions.
Suffragettes going on hunger strike in prison, and the prison authorities violently force-feeding them to the point where they sustained fairly serious injuries, was common in the early 1910s. It's not particularly pleasant reading, but there's an article from the Museum Of London that talks about some of the lengths suffragettes went to with their hunger strikes that is worth reading for anyone who isn't familiar.
I think everyone should learn about the suffrage movement and the lengths they were willing to go to to fight for women's rights, particularly with civil protest being a somewhat relevant topic over the last few years.
When did anyone destroy art with soup?
Just Stop Oil threw soup on artwork in a museum. It wasn't destroyed all the souped art had protective glass shields and they knew that which is why they did it. Basically just made a mess that you can clean up with a cloth and mop.
They've souped quite a few artworks before.
Well that's the opposite of an answer to my question, it's an example of a time they didn't destroy art with soup
Attempted to destroy art with soup read into it if you want to it's van goths sunflower painting thankfully the morons didn't account for the painting being protected by some protective glass
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-63254878
https://news.sky.com/story/just-stop-oil-protesters-throw-tomato-soup-over-van-goghs-sunflowers-masterpiece-12720183
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/14/just-stop-oil-activists-throw-soup-at-van-goghs-sunflowers
Also here's the video
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LTdquzu-BXg
???
https://youtube.com/shorts/NYUqSv1ug5o
They knew full well that the glass was there, which is why they did it to that painting. What makes you think they're morons???
Hey, while we're talking about it, why do we seem to care so much about a painting that wasn't damaged, but we don't seem to put nearly as much effort into hating on the people and companies that are actually destroying the world we live on?
Because “we” is an idiot who doesn’t understand what they are talking about but want to appear as if they do.
I'm genuinely trying to understand what information you're using to come to the conclusion that they're an idiot
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/shorts/NYUqSv1ug5o
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Does the average person tune in to watch O&G industry conventions?
I suppose that there's plastic in various electronic devices, like controllers.
There's plastic in literally everything welcome to the modern world
Well, computers run on electricity, and gaming is a frivolous use, I guess?