6 ms·

Plymouth Rock is half its original size. Tourists used to take a piece. https://www.frommers.com/destinations/plymouth-ma/attractions/plymouth-rock#:~:text=Tra

Plymouth Rock is half its original size. Tourists used to take a piece. https://www.frommers.com/destinations/plymouth-ma/attractions/plymouth-rock#:~:text=Tradition%20tells%20us%20that%20the,chipping%20away%20by%20souvenir%20hunters https://www.frommers.com/destinations/plymouth-ma/attraction.... The tourist who carved his name into the Colosseum didn’t realize how old it was? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/05/english-tourist-accused-of-carving-name-in-colosseum-says-he-did-not-realise-its-age https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/05/english-touris... Then we have someone knocking over this rock: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna56596 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna56596 It only takes a few people to ruin it. Perhaps we shouldn’t be so forgiving.

wyre 3y ago
>knocking over this rock 5 years of time to only few thousand dollars in fines? Infuriating
- WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
  > Infuriating Idiots together should make anyone itch.
lfowles 3y ago
Giving the Colosseum tourist the benefit of the doubt, maybe they thought that was a relatively "modern day" section they were carving their name on?
- WirelessGigabit 3y ago
  I disagree. Carving your name into something is disgusting.
  - Aloha 3y ago
    Perhaps, but we study roman graffiti where people from antiquity did the same thing, like, I get that its bad and should not be condoned but tourists have been carving their name into this thing for thousands of years.
    - throwaway3618 3y ago
      People have been murdering, stealing, etc since people have existed, doesn't mean we should just shrug our shoulders
    - pavel_lishin 3y ago
      We also study middens; it doesn't mean it's okay to dump your garbage in the park.
    - expensive_news 3y ago
      Not to derail, but this reminds me of a cave in Southern Arizona. Graffiti is banned and it’s heavily enforced, but there is ‘historic’ graffiti from the 1920-40s that is preserved. I always found this case very interesting.
      - Aloha 3y ago
        Thats my point - when does it transform from Graffiti to Artifact - 50 years? 100 years? 500? its still an interesting thought.
        hunter-gatherer 3y ago
        I believe it is 50 years in the US. I can't find it on mobile, but I remember reading an article a while back about some simple "john was here" on some anasazi petroglyph that hadn't been removed because it was from the late 1800s or early 1900s and was considered historic. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/how-to-list-a-property.htm https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/how-to-list-a-...
        DropInIn 3y ago
        I'll put forth that nothing of this sort, from the semiconductor age onwards, can be an artifact as we have far more readily available and detailed records to work from. Such graffiti is only an artifact when it's purpose, history and other aspects are lost to time due to lack of alternative documentation. In effectively all cases these days there is simply no additional value obtained from graffiti like this, unlike that of street artists doing murals or painting trains.
  - colechristensen 3y ago
    But also one of the most human things to do. What are precivilization cave paintings but graffiti? Leaving a mark on the world is a basic human instinct. That some things are better left intact is something that has to be learned.
    - c420 3y ago
      Pre agricultural revolution pictographs and petroglyphs are almost certainly not graffiti. Religious function, navigation, resource marking, animal migration records, record keeping... these are some of the more likely functions. Tbf, sometimes graffiti is a territorial marking and this is also a likely function.
      - wyre 3y ago
        I read in an art history book that cave paintings were used as a form of magic/manifestation and the farther down into the cave the more powerful it became.
        colechristensen 3y ago
        A lot of these kinds of things are historians/anthropologists/whatever making things up. If something doesn’t have an obvious purpose then it is labeled as ceremonial or religious. A single artifact gets turned into an elaborate story with very shaky justification. These “just so” stories make good tales, but that’s it. The question ends up being “how could they possibly know this!?” And the answer is, they couldn’t. Definitely the kind of thing you’d read in an art history book.
        wyre 3y ago
        Ya, I’m aware of all that. It’s an interesting theorem, nonetheless. I also have no credence for this forum to not be hypercritical of art history literature, but here I am talking about it.
        3y ago
  - Dalewyn 3y ago
    I'm noticing more and more restrooms open to public/shared use eschewing placing mirrors because they always get carved up with everyones' names. Clearly most people find the act memorable, manners be damned. (I find the act barbaric, personally.)
- jklinger410 3y ago
  > Giving the Colosseum tourist the benefit of the doubt Why? Carving your name into stuff that you don't own is dumb regardless of how old it is.
- rvba 3y ago
  You learn about Colosseum in primary school
  - boondoggle16 3y ago
    He wasn't a local, he was an eastern european. We love diverse cultures!
    - melling 3y ago
      He was originally from Bulgaria and there are Roman ruins there too: https://davidsbeenhere.com/2017/03/01/top-10-ancient-sites-in-bulgaria/ https://davidsbeenhere.com/2017/03/01/top-10-ancient-sites-i...
      - boondoggle16 3y ago
        unclear how that matters? it's the culture, not the presence of relics, or the education about them
KineticLensman 3y ago
A useful rule that I came across a while ago is "ask yourself before doing something (such as picking a flower in the wild), what would happen if a 100 other people did the same thing?". The answer should usually be "don't do that thing"
- knewter 3y ago
  Kant's categorical imperative
  - megmogandog 3y ago
    Sorry to be pedantic, but the categorical imperative is not about reasoning from the consequences of an action if everyone did it. It's about testing whether it's even possible for you to will the maxim of your action as a universal law without contradiction, or to what extent your action respects the rational agency of other humans. You could make the Kant-inspired argument that taking a limited resource for your private enjoyment does deprive others of their agency, but it's not Kantian to say "it's wrong to take the fossils because then there will be no more fossils."
    - Tao3300 3y ago
      See, I know you're lying because a pedant is never sorry.
      - megmogandog 3y ago
        I guess it would've been more honest to say "sorry to seem pedantic," because for me the comment was not mere pedantry (which I think of as hairsplitting for the sake of hairsplitting) but rather a matter of a fundamental distinction in moral philosophy (consequentialist vs. deontological ethics). I mean, philosophy has a reputation for just that kind of hairsplitting but this seems to bear pretty directly on the basic ethical question of "What should I do?", one of the most important questions for humans to ask imo
- pavel_lishin 3y ago
WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
> Perhaps we shouldn’t be so forgiving. A better time to teach respect might be before the incident.
sizzzzlerz 3y ago
If you know where to look, there are many panels of petroglyphs and other rock art located in the canyons and side-canyons of the desert southwest. Many are pristine and untouched but there are, unfortunately, too many that hand of idiots have defaced with their own graffiti or even bullet holes. It's the primary reason those who know where they can be found are reluctant to tell those who don't unless they are close family or friends in whom they have full trust not to mar these 700+ year old relics. It is so discouraging to see an outline of someone's hand from 1100 or the drawing of a animal right next to the "Joanie loves Chachi" some ignorant fool added in 1973.

wyre 3y ago

>knocking over this rock 5 years of time to only few thousand dollars in fines? Infuriating

WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
> Infuriating Idiots together should make anyone itch.

lfowles 3y ago

Giving the Colosseum tourist the benefit of the doubt, maybe they thought that was a relatively "modern day" section they were carving their name on?

WirelessGigabit 3y ago
I disagree. Carving your name into something is disgusting.
- Aloha 3y ago
  Perhaps, but we study roman graffiti where people from antiquity did the same thing, like, I get that its bad and should not be condoned but tourists have been carving their name into this thing for thousands of years.
  - throwaway3618 3y ago
    People have been murdering, stealing, etc since people have existed, doesn't mean we should just shrug our shoulders
  - pavel_lishin 3y ago
    We also study middens; it doesn't mean it's okay to dump your garbage in the park.
  - expensive_news 3y ago
    Not to derail, but this reminds me of a cave in Southern Arizona. Graffiti is banned and it’s heavily enforced, but there is ‘historic’ graffiti from the 1920-40s that is preserved. I always found this case very interesting.
    - Aloha 3y ago
      Thats my point - when does it transform from Graffiti to Artifact - 50 years? 100 years? 500? its still an interesting thought.
      - hunter-gatherer 3y ago
        I believe it is 50 years in the US. I can't find it on mobile, but I remember reading an article a while back about some simple "john was here" on some anasazi petroglyph that hadn't been removed because it was from the late 1800s or early 1900s and was considered historic. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/how-to-list-a-property.htm https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/how-to-list-a-...
      - DropInIn 3y ago
        I'll put forth that nothing of this sort, from the semiconductor age onwards, can be an artifact as we have far more readily available and detailed records to work from. Such graffiti is only an artifact when it's purpose, history and other aspects are lost to time due to lack of alternative documentation. In effectively all cases these days there is simply no additional value obtained from graffiti like this, unlike that of street artists doing murals or painting trains.
- colechristensen 3y ago
  But also one of the most human things to do. What are precivilization cave paintings but graffiti? Leaving a mark on the world is a basic human instinct. That some things are better left intact is something that has to be learned.
  - c420 3y ago
    Pre agricultural revolution pictographs and petroglyphs are almost certainly not graffiti. Religious function, navigation, resource marking, animal migration records, record keeping... these are some of the more likely functions. Tbf, sometimes graffiti is a territorial marking and this is also a likely function.
    - wyre 3y ago
      I read in an art history book that cave paintings were used as a form of magic/manifestation and the farther down into the cave the more powerful it became.
      - colechristensen 3y ago
        A lot of these kinds of things are historians/anthropologists/whatever making things up. If something doesn’t have an obvious purpose then it is labeled as ceremonial or religious. A single artifact gets turned into an elaborate story with very shaky justification. These “just so” stories make good tales, but that’s it. The question ends up being “how could they possibly know this!?” And the answer is, they couldn’t. Definitely the kind of thing you’d read in an art history book.
        wyre 3y ago
        Ya, I’m aware of all that. It’s an interesting theorem, nonetheless. I also have no credence for this forum to not be hypercritical of art history literature, but here I am talking about it.
        3y ago
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  I'm noticing more and more restrooms open to public/shared use eschewing placing mirrors because they always get carved up with everyones' names. Clearly most people find the act memorable, manners be damned. (I find the act barbaric, personally.)
jklinger410 3y ago
> Giving the Colosseum tourist the benefit of the doubt Why? Carving your name into stuff that you don't own is dumb regardless of how old it is.
rvba 3y ago
You learn about Colosseum in primary school
- boondoggle16 3y ago
  He wasn't a local, he was an eastern european. We love diverse cultures!
  - melling 3y ago
    He was originally from Bulgaria and there are Roman ruins there too: https://davidsbeenhere.com/2017/03/01/top-10-ancient-sites-in-bulgaria/ https://davidsbeenhere.com/2017/03/01/top-10-ancient-sites-i...
    - boondoggle16 3y ago
      unclear how that matters? it's the culture, not the presence of relics, or the education about them

KineticLensman 3y ago

A useful rule that I came across a while ago is "ask yourself before doing something (such as picking a flower in the wild), what would happen if a 100 other people did the same thing?". The answer should usually be "don't do that thing"

knewter 3y ago
Kant's categorical imperative
- megmogandog 3y ago
  Sorry to be pedantic, but the categorical imperative is not about reasoning from the consequences of an action if everyone did it. It's about testing whether it's even possible for you to will the maxim of your action as a universal law without contradiction, or to what extent your action respects the rational agency of other humans. You could make the Kant-inspired argument that taking a limited resource for your private enjoyment does deprive others of their agency, but it's not Kantian to say "it's wrong to take the fossils because then there will be no more fossils."
  - Tao3300 3y ago
    See, I know you're lying because a pedant is never sorry.
    - megmogandog 3y ago
      I guess it would've been more honest to say "sorry to seem pedantic," because for me the comment was not mere pedantry (which I think of as hairsplitting for the sake of hairsplitting) but rather a matter of a fundamental distinction in moral philosophy (consequentialist vs. deontological ethics). I mean, philosophy has a reputation for just that kind of hairsplitting but this seems to bear pretty directly on the basic ethical question of "What should I do?", one of the most important questions for humans to ask imo
pavel_lishin 3y ago

WarOnPrivacy 3y ago

> Perhaps we shouldn’t be so forgiving. A better time to teach respect might be before the incident.

sizzzzlerz 3y ago

If you know where to look, there are many panels of petroglyphs and other rock art located in the canyons and side-canyons of the desert southwest. Many are pristine and untouched but there are, unfortunately, too many that hand of idiots have defaced with their own graffiti or even bullet holes. It's the primary reason those who know where they can be found are reluctant to tell those who don't unless they are close family or friends in whom they have full trust not to mar these 700+ year old relics. It is so discouraging to see an outline of someone's hand from 1100 or the drawing of a animal right next to the "Joanie loves Chachi" some ignorant fool added in 1973.