Free Font Contest
Charles A. Bigelow
be even better. Among the greater moments of 1993 was the deeply illuminating
metaphysical pronouncement that "Information WANTS to be free!" Remember that?
How could you forget it? It is something to help guide one's life, like one of
George Bush's 1,000 points of light. A beacon in the dark reaches of unknown
cyberspace. And speaking of a thousand points, how about all those urgent
inquires from people who had downloaded 1,000 afm files from the Adobe server,
and were puzzled and astonished that the darned things wouldn't print? Those
desperate souls often gave us very detailed reports of the exact error messages
they were getting, and the exact version of their OS, their printer specs, and
so on, in the hope that we readers could spot the subtle bug that was
preventing the afms from printing. Some of the savvier folks in this quandry,
who had gotten some inkling of the nature of their problem, didn't bother with
all the bug reports and simply asked for a pointer to some free conversion
software that would convert afm to pfa or pfb Type1 files. I salute these brave
explorers, and hope that all the considerate answers that generous readers sent
them have proved helpful.
I think it is a pity that so many fine postings to comp.fonts are ultimately
forgotten, and I would like to help commemorate the best of them. Therefore, I
offer an award:
**The Best Stupid Remarks on comp.fonts Contest**
Prize:
------
This will be, of course, a collection of fonts. But, this collection is
available nowhere else. You can't buy it, you can't rip it off, you can't get
it anywhere except by winning this contest! These are all original fonts by
Bigelow & Holmes, some of which are or will be created specially for this
contest. Prize Font Highlights include:
- offensive hand signals; these exquisitely drawn renderings of popular
hand signals, just like the ones that fine drivers use on the open
roads of America every day, were drawn by the same hands, so to speak,
that drew the popular Microsoft (R) Wingdings (TM) dingbat set.
In addition to the universal driver's salute, some of the more popular
Mediterranean hand gestures are also included. These are just the
things to spice up a memo or fax to your boss or customer. They are
especially appropriate for resignation notices. When e-mail breaks out
of its ASCII prison, these little works of art will become especially
useful. And remember, you can't get these anywhere else except by
winning this contest.
- Lucida (R) variations that never should have seen the light of day.
These are versions of the Lucida family that the designers thought had
been safely discarded forever, but in actuality these fonts have been
preserved in liquid nitrogen, waiting for revival. They include:
"Lucida Typewriter Oblique Antique" - it's fixed-pitch, it's got
serifs, it's slanted, and best of all, it's really crufty. For users
who are tired of that thin, smooth, spindly, wimpy PostScript Courier
that looks like a piece of cheap, narrow-gauge PVC plumbing, here's
a monospaced font that makes a real impression on the page. Anyone who
gets a memo from you in this font will think something's gone wrong
with your printer.
These and the other fine prize fonts will become yours for free if you win this
contest. These fonts would be worth over $200 if you could buy them in the
retail market, but you can't! Of course, if you believe that "information WANTS
to be free" and prefer to steal fonts because you're not into paying for things
that should be free, then these prize fonts would be worth nothing, if you
could rip them off, but you can't! Either way, you've got to win to get these
fonts. (Of course, once the contest is over, and the winners have received
their prizes, they might consent to give copies of these fine fonts to those
less fortunate, assuming that the iron-clad "shrink-wrap" license permits such
"gifts".)
Categories of Entries:
----------------------
1) The stupidest metaphysical remark. This should be a short, pithy
pronouncement of deep, deep significance, something that can guide us
into the bozotic 21st century. In considering candidates, it might be
helpful to remember what Niels Bohr is said to have said about the
difference between clarity and depth:
"A clear statement is a statement to which the opposite is
either true or false. A deep statement is a statement to which
the opposite is another deep statement."
Remember, entries in this category must be short and succinct. Long,
rambling disquisitions, flares, and flames will not qualify.
2) The stupidest technical remark. This can be a statement or a
question, and can be supported by various "facts", "figures", and
other supporting data. It need not be longer than a sentence or two,
but because of the inherent complexity and prolixity of confusion,
long, muddled, hopelessly confused submissions will be considered.
Mere ignorance will be accepted as a kind of virtual stupidity, though
aggressive, arrogant, willful stupidity will also be considered, as
long as it is expressed in purely technical terms. However, aggressive
arrogant, willful *metaphysical* stupidity must be entered in category
(1) above.
In addition to pure stupidity, related qualitites such as inanity,
vapidity, moronicity, bogosity, bozoticity, absurdity, ludicrousity,
and ridiculousity may be considered. If the judges burst out laughing
when they see an entry, it might just be a winner.
Terms of Award:
---------------
Only one entry per person may be submitted in each category of stupidity.
Two prizes will be awarded in each category. One prize will go to the person
who actually made the winning remark, and a duplicate prize (that's right,
because information wants to be free, we just *copy* the same font set) will be
given to the person who enters the remark in the contest. Really, two people
are required to have a stupid remark - one person to make it and the other to
appreciate it. Therefore, this contest rewards both. If more than one person
submits the same winning remark, all the submitters will receive the prize
(that's right, we just make more copies, because, after all, information wants
to be free), as well as the maker of the remark. If the distinguished contest
judges, in their wisdom and perspicacity, adjudge two or more entries as
tied for maximal stupidity in a category, why then we'll give duplicate
awards to the tying entries (because information wants....). Contestants are
permitted to submit their own remarks, of course, but it might reduce the odds
of winning. On the other hand, the distinguished judges might admire the smug
hybris of someone who is so convinced of his own premiere moronicity that he
enters his own remarks, so entering your own stuff might be worth the risk.
All candidate remarks must have been posted originally to comp.fonts in 1994,
from January 1 to December 31. The remarks may not be copyrighted, because,
after all, we need to post them to announce the winners, and probably people
will want to forward them around the world, if the remarks are sufficiently
memorable to deserve such distribution, and I'm sure they will be. (I apologize
for posting this late. There may already have been some winning remarks posted
during the past few days, so be sure to look back over the important messages
already posted this year. A winner might be waiting for you already!)
How to Enter:
-------------
Submit your candidate in each category by including the original header of the
posting and the candidate remark, which may be an excerpt from a longer
posting. It may pay to seek a diamond in the rough. Only one entry per
category per person.
On December 31, 1994, e-mail your entries to me, big...@cs.stanford.edu. I
will forward them to the distinguished panel of judges, who will give them
careful consideration on New Year's Eve, or another time when they are
conveniently semi-conscious. Please don't send me anything in advance. I will
only delete it or purge it, and you will lose your chance of winning. Random
stupid remarks posted to comp.fonts but not formally submitted to the contest
will not qualify. You must enter to win.
REMEMBER, only one entry per person per category.
The Judges:
-----------
In order to maintain maximal objectivity, I have disqualified myself from
judging and from winning (and, in order to avoid self-referential stupidity,
this posting itself, no matter how stupid it may be, will not be accepted as
an entry in either category). I have invited a small number of distinguished
personages to be on a panel of distinguished judges to impartially review the
entries. Actually, I invited a large number of distinguished personages to be
judges, but most of them just flat-out refused. Nevertheless, a few brave
souls have accepted. The judges will remain anonymous, in an attempt to avoid
the awful temptation of bribery, jury-rigging, etc., on the part of
unscrupulous contestants. We want this contest to be conducted with the highest
ethical principles, just like in the font industry itself! But, just to show
that the judges are not ordinary bozos, I will reveal that one judge is a
distinguished editor at a major technical publishing house, and another is a
distinguished engineer of text handling technology at a major computer
manufacturer, and another is a distinguished inventor of rendering technology.
All decisions by the judges are final.
Announcement of Winners:
------------------------
All winners will be notified by e-mail. If the prize is accepted, the winners'
names along with their winning remarks will be announced to this group. If a
winner refuses the honor, his or her name and remark will not be posted. If
the maker of a winning remark refuses the honor, the submitter will still
receive a prize, on the condition that he or she will not reveal the winning
remark and the name of the person who made it. After all, we want to preserve
the right to privacy. On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog.
Limitations:
------------
This offer is void where prohibited by law. Winners are required to pay any and
all state, local, and federal taxes that may be due on their prizes (so, 'tis
better to calculate the fair market value based on the standard "rip-off" cost
of zero rather than the premiere retail price).
If this contest interrupts the normal free flow of information on comp.fonts,
and readers begin to complain that there is an unusually high incidence of
really stupid remarks being submitted, and it is scientifically determined that
such an unusually high incidence of stupidity is due to would-be contestants
competing to say some really stupid things just to win the contest, and not due
to something like sunspots or loss of the ozone layer or El Nin~o or just the
normal, random variation of stupidity, then the organizer reserves the right to
cancel the contest in the interest of the common good and the free flow of
net information that wants to be free.
Happy New Year, and good luck to you.
-- Chuck Bigelow
[apologies if you get this twice]
Angus Duggan
On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog.
Woof! (Do I win a prize?)
a.
--
Angus Duggan, Harlequin Ltd., Barrington Hall | PBMtoPK, PKtoBDF and PSUtils
Barrington, Cambridge CB2 5RG, U.K. | are available from:
INET: an...@harlequin.co.uk | ftp.dcs.ed.ac.uk in pub/ajcd.
Anton Sherwood
What if I say two stupid things and they are submitted by two spotters?
--
Disclaimer: The above is likely to refer to anecdotal evidence.
Anton Sherwood *\\* +1 415 267 0685 *\\* DAS...@netcom.com
Bureau of Making Sure You Eat Your Vegetables and Get Enough Sleep
d-(++) p+--- c++++- !l u e- m+@ s++/+ n+ h f g+ w++ t r- y+
Charles A. Bigelow
>In article <1994Jan5.0...@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> big...@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU (Charles A. Bigelow) writes:
>>Only one entry per person may be submitted in each category of stupidity.
>
>What if I say two stupid things and they are submitted by two spotters?
>--
The outcome depends on the decision of the judges. If you say two stupid things
and they are submitted by two spotters, but the judges don't award a prize to
either one, in any category, then neither you nor the spotters win anything,
excvept, of course, the personal intellectual satisfaction of having said and
recognized stupid things, respectively. Similar satisfactions are often
recommended to font designers who see their work widely plagiarized but who
don't receive any monetary awards for their creative work.
On the other hand, if you are lucky enough or skilled enough to make two
winning remarks, one in each category, then you and the spotters will share the
prizes. Since information wants to be free, it will be easy enough to create
duplicate copies of the same prize for everyone. In such a circumstance, I
might, however, just send you one copy, and suggest that you make your own
duplicate, since there is some satisfaction to be gained by the creative
procedure of copying font files.
-- Chuck Bigelow
Max Headroom
> In article <1994Jan5.0...@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> big...@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU (Charles A. Bigelow) writes:
> >Only one entry per person may be submitted in each category of stupidity.
>
> What if I say two stupid things and they are submitted by two spotters?
What if I'm too stupid to know that I'm stupid, and any spotters are too
stupid to realize that I'm stupid, so stupidly assuming that I'm so stupid
as to win anything, I'll never know that I was too stupid to be stupid...
Stupid?
-Max