
Sandbox twaddle
Forum rules
READ: The Origami Forum Rules & Regulations
READ: The Origami Forum Rules & Regulations
Sandbox twaddle
Okay I wanted to try out the Mulberry paper so I folded a simple octopus (my own design).


-
TheRealChris
- Moderator
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: May 17th, 2003, 1:01 pm
- Location: Germany
-
TheRealChris
- Moderator
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: May 17th, 2003, 1:01 pm
- Location: Germany
- thedeadsmellbad
- Forum Sensei
- Posts: 773
- Joined: December 23rd, 2004, 12:27 am
- Location: U.S.A
- Contact:
-
TheRealChris
- Moderator
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: May 17th, 2003, 1:01 pm
- Location: Germany
I read through my last 90 posts to find that arrogance ( I never take criticism easy!!). ok there where some postings that could be taken wrong, as long as the reader doesn't know how to handle smileys. I corrected you, Joseph, with the Elefantenhaut, but there was a twinkle-smiley after that. and there was one posting in "interesting websites". oh yeah, I didn't like Dani's posting-models-idea... how could I dare to tell.Chris, you've been acting like me lately: a little too confident that you are right. I do it all the time. I don't mean to sound like an arrogant know-it-all, but that's how it comes across sometimes.
maybe you can give me some examples, I really want to know, in which cases I acted somehow like arrogant, because I never wanted to do that.
as for the octopus: I know, that DavidW is proud of his model, and I never said, that it's a bad thing. I even told him, that it's nice.
Et tu, Brute. (You also, Brutus.)Joseph Wu just became one of my hero's.
Christian
Last edited by TheRealChris on August 1st, 2005, 5:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Chris, your tone was arrogant and condescending, and after that your attempt to say something positive came off as sarcastic instead. Your post was rude, why can't you see that?
If you didn't have a moderator tag, I would swear that you were trolling for a response. You don't know anything about the model except what the final result looks like and you're going to tell me (a) how it's folded, (b) how it's trivial and thus (c) how it's a waste of time and then give me a pat on the shoulder and say there, there it was a good try anyway.
I am open to constructive criticism, but destructive criticism is inappropriate and has no place on an origami forum.
If you didn't have a moderator tag, I would swear that you were trolling for a response. You don't know anything about the model except what the final result looks like and you're going to tell me (a) how it's folded, (b) how it's trivial and thus (c) how it's a waste of time and then give me a pat on the shoulder and say there, there it was a good try anyway.
I am open to constructive criticism, but destructive criticism is inappropriate and has no place on an origami forum.
DavidW now you get really childish. Chris told you that your octopus is nice, he doesn´t say that it would be a waste of time. The only thing he mentioned was that it is a very common first design to come up with. That isn´t rude, that´s a fact, sorry.
I´m sure you will call me now arrogant too, but think about the words you´ve written and maybe you will see that you´ve reacted like a huffy child.
I´m sure you will call me now arrogant too, but think about the words you´ve written and maybe you will see that you´ve reacted like a huffy child.
Last edited by origami_8 on August 16th, 2007, 12:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
TheRealChris
- Moderator
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: May 17th, 2003, 1:01 pm
- Location: Germany
maybe, because you're the only one, that thought, it was rude? you are proud of your octopus, and somebody (in this case me) told you, that somebody else had the same idea before, and now you're offended.Chris, your tone was arrogant and condescending, and after that your attempt to say something positive came off as sarcastic instead. Your post was rude, why can't you see that?
I didn't wanted to insult you in any way. if I did, I'm sorry about that, but I wasn't rude, it's only your imagination that made it rude!
you're right, I don't have a clue, how your octopus worksYou don't know anything about the model except what the final result looks like and you're going to tell me (a) how it's folded, (b) how it's trivial

and once more: I neither said nor ment anything like this.and thus (c) how it's a waste of time and then give me a pat on the shoulder and say there, there it was a good try anyway.
Christian
-
TheRealChris
- Moderator
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: May 17th, 2003, 1:01 pm
- Location: Germany
- origamimasterjared
- Buddha
- Posts: 1670
- Joined: August 13th, 2004, 6:25 pm
- Contact:
David,
While it is perfectly understandable that you are upset by Chris's trivialization of your Octopus, you should realize a couple of things:
1) From the photo you can tell the basic folding method, namely a blintzed-bird base.
2) It is not uncommon to independently come up with identical designs. Think of the frog-base X-wing. It was Joseph Wu's first model, my third, and countless others came up with the same thing. Sure, the style and shaping may have differed between the designs, but they were still the same basic structure--a frog base.
I ran into the same sort of criticism a couple years after I came up with what turned out to be Momotani's "flower". I came up with a spider that I thought was awesome, only to find out later how similar it was to Lang's Orb Weaver. Tachi Tomohiro's Flying beetles are from the same base as mine were, (but I doubt he knows it.)
Then again they aren't always as they seem. I came up with a Millenium Falcon design that looked identical to Phil Schulz's latest one, and emailed him immediately about it, only to later realize his was from a 2 x 1 rectangle.
Most every origami creator has run into the same situation at one time or another. Sure it sucks, but hey, at least no one's accusing you of stealing.
So be proud of your octopus. But realize others have come up with the same basic thing.
While it is perfectly understandable that you are upset by Chris's trivialization of your Octopus, you should realize a couple of things:
1) From the photo you can tell the basic folding method, namely a blintzed-bird base.
2) It is not uncommon to independently come up with identical designs. Think of the frog-base X-wing. It was Joseph Wu's first model, my third, and countless others came up with the same thing. Sure, the style and shaping may have differed between the designs, but they were still the same basic structure--a frog base.
I ran into the same sort of criticism a couple years after I came up with what turned out to be Momotani's "flower". I came up with a spider that I thought was awesome, only to find out later how similar it was to Lang's Orb Weaver. Tachi Tomohiro's Flying beetles are from the same base as mine were, (but I doubt he knows it.)
Then again they aren't always as they seem. I came up with a Millenium Falcon design that looked identical to Phil Schulz's latest one, and emailed him immediately about it, only to later realize his was from a 2 x 1 rectangle.
Most every origami creator has run into the same situation at one time or another. Sure it sucks, but hey, at least no one's accusing you of stealing.
So be proud of your octopus. But realize others have come up with the same basic thing.