wewlad
Wewlad
Other urls found in this thread:
it's a metaphor
Ok one of these players is clearly a false-flagging Jew
This is actually really cool
especially when you're drunk
>asian making two white armies fight
((()))
The real genius behind the Beatles
wtf how does this have to do with trust
the two people would just argue and forget where their pieces were
>wtf how does this have to do with trust
It doesn't, Yoko is just a stupid bitch as usual in desperate need of a beating
Thats why it's about trusting the other person, mongo. You trust that the other person is moving their own pieces
What did she mean by this???
both sides are white so they actually just build a functioning society instead of fighting x D
but there is no punishment for not being truthful with the person you're playing with, and eventually you'd end up forgetting which ones were you anyway. this is such a half baked concept it hurts
that's actually the point of this art piece ;)
this but unironically
Or you could just pay attention and be truthful and play by the rules. Why does there have to be punishment in order to keep someone from being a shit.
There's an incentive to be deceptive because it could help you win
>Why does there have to be punishment in order to keep someone from being a shit.
>why do jails exist
that sounds kinda racist haha get it I'm topical
but like, wouldn't it be cooler if she actually thought of an incentive for both players to trust and rely on eachother, instead of just half-assedly switching the colors and attaching some bullshit to it that doesn't even work in the context of the game?
the entire point is whether or not you're going to argue when you don't truly remember, or even consciously cheat by claiming you do recall a piece or pawn being yours. it's a clever idea. it's art of course, and you shouldn't be bothered with whether or not it could be a practical variation of chess. and the actual limitation would be if the players were good at chess or had a natural talent for it. because for people like that it would be far easier to remember who controls what
it doesnt feel like she intended to create conflict between the players given the description. it seems like she wanted the players to have to trust eachother in order for the game to work, which is retarded because it wouldn't actually play out like that.
also, if it's not supposed to work in the context of chess, then why include the game at all?
it's objectively not a very clever or well thought out idea.
If two decent human beings are playing, they aren't going to consciously cheat. If someone's cheating at a board game, they have no hope in life
but then why involve "trust" at all if it's understood that no one would ever cheat??? it just becomes a fucking memory game then
Here's a video of John and Yoko playing it :^)
youtube.com
if both pieces are white, who moves first?
how did they get away with this?
how can a song say NIGGER and just be? wheres the outrage? i mean holy shit, it got a pass because it was "ironic"?
Only white americans aren't allowed to say nigger, Brits, Japs, it's ok, well a little passé and indelicate but not: holy shit!
also when you search it in youtube it says "niger", but hte actual songs write "nigger" on the top. whats that they literally cover their eyes when faced a 'dirty' word? they are negating such word exists in reality?
'nigger' isn't advertiser-friendly
i'm high enough to want to explain this to you
of course she doesn't intend for people to argue, but that is the issue and the core of it. you have to trust each other and be honest in order for the game to go smoothly. if you're dishonest or you don't trust the other person then it will be held up with an argument over who controls what
i was simply telling you that judging art by it's practicality isn't wise. this actually would work perfectly well in chess. people with experience could do it very easily, many are able to play blindfolded and remember where everything is. couldn't be more difficult than that. also, people play 'bughouse' chess a lot at tournaments. that is a far stranger variation than this and it works perfectly well, i've played it. it's a 2v2 with asymmetrical colors and you give your ally anything you capture. your ally is allowed to place those pieces and pawns anywhere on his own board. and there are two clocks involved. that is far more complex and it works easily for people who are children without vast experience
Art=fart
it was a different time
after the thread where we argued about whether or not video games are art, I've lost all faith in Sup Forums to have intelligent discussion about anything
you chose something stupid to have faith in
yeah I realize that now :(
That's actually pretty good for art.