3 ms·

Two people and a pet isn’t really a “collective”

• subpub47 2y ago
  This is the best critique of the entire idea, clearly.
• nfrmatk 2y ago
  That's the most constructive takeaway you have when looking at all their work? That's an unnecessarily limited view and doesn't add to the conversation. From my vantage point their work fits the definition nicely. "A collective body" [1] ... "Collectivized or characterized by collectivism" [1] ... "A political or economic theory advocating collective control especially over production and distribution" [2] [1]: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collective https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collective [2]: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collectivism https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collectivism
  • blacksmith_tb 2y ago
    I wouldn't say it's a completely throwaway dis. As much as I like Orca it easily could be that calling themselves "a collective" is putting on airs or pretending to be a bigger movement than they are. But it could also be tongue-in-cheek, self-parody, or theater of the absurd (which seems more likely).
• tumult 2y ago
  There are a bunch of contributors to these projects. I wrote the C version of Orca (and helped design the second version of its evaluation strategy) but also had help and ideas from other contributors as well. I wrote the Windows version of Uxn, Uxn32, which was a from-scratch implementation, except for a couple of things like the palette mixing table. The code from Uxn32's VM core ended up in other versions of Uxn emulators, which were then modified and improved by the people running those projects. There is not any governing body, committees, or authoritative leadership for these projects. We just talk to each other through various channels and do stuff. It's a collective.