4 ms·

Well, you have this enormous amount of energy in the form of college rivalries going towards (in my opinion) a relatively silly ball game. Our hypothesis is tha

by jinpan 14y ago

Well, you have this enormous amount of energy in the form of college rivalries going towards (in my opinion) a relatively silly ball game. Our hypothesis is that if you could tap just 1% of that energy, you could accomplish something great. This is our first foray into tapping that intensity.

bradleyland 14y ago
Ever heard the aphorism, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"? Your intent is to tap a negative to achieve a positive. Unfortunately, you also reinforce a negative. Clothing a homeless individual with a rival's garb as a means to insult one's rival reinforces the idea that it is ok to use a homeless person as an instrument of insult. It is not. It is dehumanizing, and treads dangerously close to the line of thinking that leads to projects like Bum Fights [1]. 1 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bum_fights http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bum_fights
- IsaacL 14y ago
  I agree. Also, I imagine homeless people aren't short of jackets - cheap clothes are very cheap these days, relatively speaking. (I don't know about the States, but in the UK a cheap jacket in a bargain shop might be <£10. (Then again America is a lot colder than the UK in parts)) And there's plenty of jumble sales, charity donations of old clothes, etc. This reminds me of that guy who did the (failed) million-tshirts-to-Africa project. Good intentions, bad idea.
- jinpan 14y ago
  It is certainly not our hope that people use this as an avenue to dehumanize the unfortunate. But is it more acceptable to see the unfortunate clearly wearing thin clothing when it's 20 degrees out and maintain the idea that they are people who must maintain their pride, or offer them the chance to sell out? It's a hard question to answer, but I think society has already answered that for us. Fast food restaurants already offer young professionals a chance to sell out by offering higher wages than many starting jobs in alternative industries [1]. 1 - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/magazine/skills-dont-pay-the-bills.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/magazine/skills-dont-pay-t...
  - bradleyland 14y ago
    > It is certainly not our hope that people use this as an avenue to dehumanize the unfortunate. There is no way to use a homeless person as a prop that doesn't dehumanize them. > But is it more acceptable to see the unfortunate clearly wearing thin clothing when it's 20 degrees out and maintain the idea that they are people who must maintain their pride, or offer them the chance to sell out? I wholely reject this line of thinking. Doing one thing right does not absolve a wrong. By that line of reasoning, the people in the Bum Fights videos were better off, because they were paid. Net positive, am I right!?

by jinpan 14y ago

bradleyland 14y ago

Ever heard the aphorism, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"? Your intent is to tap a negative to achieve a positive. Unfortunately, you also reinforce a negative. Clothing a homeless individual with a rival's garb as a means to insult one's rival reinforces the idea that it is ok to use a homeless person as an instrument of insult. It is not. It is dehumanizing, and treads dangerously close to the line of thinking that leads to projects like Bum Fights [1]. 1 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bum_fights http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bum_fights

IsaacL 14y ago
I agree. Also, I imagine homeless people aren't short of jackets - cheap clothes are very cheap these days, relatively speaking. (I don't know about the States, but in the UK a cheap jacket in a bargain shop might be <£10. (Then again America is a lot colder than the UK in parts)) And there's plenty of jumble sales, charity donations of old clothes, etc. This reminds me of that guy who did the (failed) million-tshirts-to-Africa project. Good intentions, bad idea.
jinpan 14y ago
It is certainly not our hope that people use this as an avenue to dehumanize the unfortunate. But is it more acceptable to see the unfortunate clearly wearing thin clothing when it's 20 degrees out and maintain the idea that they are people who must maintain their pride, or offer them the chance to sell out? It's a hard question to answer, but I think society has already answered that for us. Fast food restaurants already offer young professionals a chance to sell out by offering higher wages than many starting jobs in alternative industries [1]. 1 - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/magazine/skills-dont-pay-the-bills.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/magazine/skills-dont-pay-t...
- bradleyland 14y ago
  > It is certainly not our hope that people use this as an avenue to dehumanize the unfortunate. There is no way to use a homeless person as a prop that doesn't dehumanize them. > But is it more acceptable to see the unfortunate clearly wearing thin clothing when it's 20 degrees out and maintain the idea that they are people who must maintain their pride, or offer them the chance to sell out? I wholely reject this line of thinking. Doing one thing right does not absolve a wrong. By that line of reasoning, the people in the Bum Fights videos were better off, because they were paid. Net positive, am I right!?