- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or # to comment.
The font was chosen in an effort to make documents easier to read for the vision impaired.
So It’s Republican policy that the government must not, even in the smallest way, make life any easier for disabled people? And the government must not do nothing and leave in place something that already makes life easier for them, but must actively intervene to make it harder? Of course it is, but what the fuck is wrong with these people that they dedicate their entire life to getting into government so they can punch down and hurt others? How have they not even accidentally stumbled into being better than the worst they can be?
Its the culling of the herd. They feel they know best what the make up of the country should be. Its the same thing as eugenics. It makes sense if you think helping the disabled is a waste of resources.
How do you develop this point of view? How did people become convinced the h man was right? People are susceptible to propaganda. I heard the comments on popular sites about Taylor Swift being pro right after her last album was 25% astroturf. Heard from Phil Defranco on yt, there was a study.
Go look at the shit on truth social. I’ve met people that only look at the conservative part of the web, like fox news junkies of the last 25 years. They’re radicalized by astroturf, then hide in these echo chambers. Most of the discourse is directed by people with vested interest in political outcomes.
People I was friendly with were trying to say Charlie Kirk would have been a good president when he died. He was such a kind and selfless Christian, they say. I cant find anything defendable in his media output, but once you’re radicalized, its just about hitting the talking points. “Woke ideology.” “Trans mind virus.” “Communists and Socialists.” “Empathy is bad for our coutry.” Once you believe you’re surrounded by enemies, its easy to be manipulated by fear.
Fuck serif fonts. The point of writing is to communicate clearly. Not look pretty and fancy-pants IMO.
I hate cursive for the same reason. It’s elitist trash script.
I agree with you and think it’s worthwhile to critically evaluate fonts.
So what happens if we evaluate cursive font? Well, for most people, loopy cursive is hard to read.
To understand why loopy cursive is problematic, here’s an excerpt from two experts on handwriting:
Conventional looped cursive has not held up to modern life and is being abandoned by most adults, because
- Its decorative loops and excessive joins obscure visual cues,
- It loses legibility when written quickly,
- It doesn’t reflect the writing we see in type or on screen, and
- 100% joined writing is typically slower and no more legible than writing that joins most, but not all letters.
So loopy cursive sucks, but does that mean that we should straight up ditch cursive altogether? Are there fonts that are quick to write and legible? Turns out, those same experts built a handwriting system, the Getty-Dubay system. Their writing system does not seek to “look pretty and fancy-pants” (to quote you). Instead, their writing system tries to “communicate clearly” (to quote you again). They built something logical and pragmatic.
How can you be sure of what I’m saying? Well, you be the judge!
Here’s a picture of the Getty-Dubay fonts, both print and cursive:
Here’s a comparison of different cursive fonts:
If you want more information, here’s a resource you can check out: https://handwritingsuccess.com/why-cursive/
So yeah, the way I see it, loopy cursive is hell, and italic-based cursive is the best of both worlds: italic-based cursive is fast to write and easy to read.
