Flag

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Bones" data-cid="514513" data-time="1441755090">
<div>
I'm confused, ferns only grow in NZ? Really?
</div>
</blockquote>
 
I think he means Cyathea dealbata (Silver Fern) which is an NZ plant not naturally found elsewhere.

mariner4life

This is an aside, but it's a similar story to the above
 
Here in Cairns we have this park near the centre of the city that isn't used by anyone except circles of drunk aboriginals (and no that's not a racist generalisation, it's a problem acknowledged by the police, in the paper today they said they have poured out 1,800 litres of booze this year). The Council have a plan to develop the site into a parklands and cultural entertainment precinct. Currently, this park looks like shit, and no one seems to go there except when the circus is in town, but it does have some big old trees on it. The council plan is pretty good, and is a much-needed boost to the city, providing a few jobs etc, as well as generally improving the city.
 
Of course, the development requires the chopping down of a few trees. Yes, they are old, but they are fucking Mango trees, this isn't some rare, slow growing species of tree we're talking here. And the Council's plan will be replacing the current trees with 64 other native trees.
 
Of course, the hippy fuckwits are out in force. Some smelly long-haired fluffybunny has been sitting in it for a week. Countless letters/texts to the paper about how the council are destroying the city. If you listened to the chatter, you would think the masses are against the project. The reality is the exact opposite. But, as usual (and as above) the minority are by far the loudest. There's always some spokesman from some never-before-heard-of environmental action group wanting to put in their 2 cents. And the message is all the same, progess is bad and evil, the status quo should be maintained at all costs. 
 
It's a fucking issue up here with a battling economy, and a couple of big issues that could change the place (a massive international resort, and dredging out the port) facing vocal opposition from an ill-informed minority. Fuck social media.

MajorRage

Mariner, have you thought about the children?

mariner4life

I have, and i am fucked if i am taking my kids to that park in its current state.

Crucial

I think you should give that big mango tree a hug 
Then slip some dynamite in it and run like hell.

Baron Silas Greenback

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="mariner4life" data-cid="514516" data-time="1441756434">
<div>
This is an aside, but it's a similar story to the above
 
Here in Cairns we have this park near the centre of the city that isn't used by anyone except circles of drunk aboriginals (and no that's not a racist generalisation, it's a problem acknowledged by the police, in the paper today they said they have poured out 1,800 litres of booze this year). The Council have a plan to develop the site into a parklands and cultural entertainment precinct. Currently, this park looks like shit, and no one seems to go there except when the circus is in town, but it does have some big old trees on it. The council plan is pretty good, and is a much-needed boost to the city, providing a few jobs etc, as well as generally improving the city.
 
Of course, the development requires the chopping down of a few trees. Yes, they are old, but they are fucking Mango trees, this isn't some rare, slow growing species of tree we're talking here. And the Council's plan will be replacing the current trees with 64 other native trees.
 
Of course, the hippy fuckwits are out in force. Some smelly long-haired fluffybunny has been sitting in it for a week. Countless letters/texts to the paper about how the council are destroying the city. If you listened to the chatter, you would think the masses are against the project. The reality is the exact opposite. But, as usual (and as above) the minority are by far the loudest. There's always some spokesman from some never-before-heard-of environmental action group wanting to put in their 2 cents. And the message is all the same, progess is bad and evil, the status quo should be maintained at all costs. 
 
It's a fucking issue up here with a battling economy, and a couple of big issues that could change the place (a massive international resort, and dredging out the port) facing vocal opposition from an ill-informed minority. Fuck social media. 
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
You are such a mean spirited 1% 'er

mariner4life

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="514528" data-time="1441760284">
<div>
You are such a mean spirited 1% 'er
</div>
</blockquote>
probably the most accurate thing you have ever posted

ACT Crusader

Hey mariner, I started following that story last week and read about the undercover cop that posed as a protester. He was doing his shift of sitting up the tree when the council arrived. He was asked to come down by police and he did and they immediately started chopping that one down yesterday.

Hooroo

Brilliant!

mariner4life

yea, it's pretty funny alright. They did the same sort of thing to get rid of the fuckwits who tried to stop the Skyrail development (now widely regarded as one of the best things to ever happen to Cairns).
 
my favourite quote so far is from some hippy bitch called "Del One" who said "I think this whole thing has created awareness that we are all an interconnected lifeforce" first class hippy bullshit right there.

No Quarter

That is fucking brilliant from the police.

dogmeat

Apologies for the length but I found this an interesting perspective from an outsider but one who knows NZ well.
 
Author - Jarrett Walker - is a yank and consultant on public transport who has worked with Akl Transport. I had to remove his images as Forum software didn't like them
 
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.humantransit.org/2015/09/can-visual-design-learn-from-the-new-zealand-flag-debate.html'>http://www.humantransit.org/2015/09/can-visual-design-learn-from-the-new-zealand-flag-debate.html</a>
 
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
If you care at all about visual communication -- and if you aren't blind from birth, then you do -- you should be following the remarkable debate about the New Zealand flag. National flags are so enduring that it is hard to imagine a graphic design task with higher stakes. Revising one triggers a profound argument about national identity, which ultimately comes down to a couple of questions:
<ol><li> One or many ideas? Can the nation come together around one image or idea, or must there me a mash-up of several to satisfy different groups or points of view?</li>
<li> Fashionable or enduring? Graphic design is so much about fashion and fun that identifying an image that will make sense for decades is harder than it sounds. Yet that's what a flag must be - and the greatest company logos have mastered this challenge as well.</li>
</ol>To review, the current New Zealand flag looks like this: (Current flag)
 
The Union Jack and the Southern Cross, the latter a distinctive constellation that is also on Australia's flag. (With all due respect to defenders of this flag, both images are about New Zealand's tie to other countries, countries that the nation's identity has lately been separating from. I also understand the view that flags should never change on principle; that is a different debate.)
The New Zealand flag seems disconnected from the evolving palette of national identity. National imagery rarely uses the flag's colors. Sometimes it uses blue-green colors that echo the textures of the landscape; you will find these in the customs hall at Auckland Airport for example. Increasingly, though, the government uses black. The association of black with New Zealand comes from another image that is so universal that some visitors probably think it's the flag already: (Silver Fern on Black)
 
This image is most common in sports, as it's the logo of most national teams including the famous All Blacks of rugby, but it long ago spilled over into the general consciousness as an unofficial symbol of the country. 
If I may reveal botanical interests more suited to <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://urbanist.typepad.com/'>my other blog,</a> this is not just any random leaf or frond. It's based on the underside of the spectacular Silver Fern, Cyathea dealbata, one of the tree ferns that define so many New Zealand rainforests (top on left, underside on right).
 
Sports and tree-hugging in one image! This would seem to make the silver fern a winner across the cultural spectrum. It might also remind you of another former British colony that tired of its Union Jack, and forged a new identity out of botany:
 
The Canadian flag was <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Canada'>adopted</a> in February 1965, so it just turned 50. Like the Silver Fern in New Zealand, the maple leaf had been hanging around in Canadian imagery for a while. So it's not surprising to see the fern so prominent in New Zealand flag ideas.
So how has the debate gone? Well, the government's earnest committee canvassed the country and came up with these semi-finalists: (the 40)
 
It's remarkable how much consensus there was on which images matter: the Southern Cross, a gesture toward the old flag, plus two main expressions of the fern: the frond and the spiral form called the <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koru'>koru</a>. (The latter, common in Maori imagery, is based on the shape of a frond as it just unfurls.) 
When you look at that field of contenders, does your eye go to the busier ones or the simpler ones? Mine went to the simplest, the ones with a single idea, not a collision of several, and the ones that looked enduring by virtue of not trying to be sexy. For that reason, the original silver-fern-on-black still looked right to me. 
But the people who chose the <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://www.govt.nz/browse/engaging-with-government/the-nz-flag-your-chance-to-decide/'>four finalists</a> felt differently:
 
... at which point, <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/04/new-zealanders-offered-flag-shortlist-ask-can-we-have-this-one-instead'>all hell broke loose</a>. There are many complaints, including that three of the four are too similar to represent a choice, and that #2 is already selling plastic plates:
But the real problems are these:
<ul><li>#2 and #4 are both mash-ups, obviously collisions of multiple unresolved ideas. A mash-up suggests that the country is too divided to revere any single image. If Canada -- a far more diverse country in terms of landscapes and identities -- could avoid this mistake, New Zealand certainly can. (<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://www.google.com/search?q=british+columbia+flag&client=safari&rls=en&tbm=isch&imgil=U6vTvzDrrfkcBM%253A%253BNMMSo7AdEkmFNM%253Bhttps%25253A%25252F%25252Fen.wikipedia.org%25252Fwiki%25252FFlag_of_British_Columbia&source=iu&pf=m&fir=U6vTvzDrrfkcBM%253A%252CNMMSo7AdEkmFNM%252C_&biw=1379&bih=1339&usg=__t6THhQzYAFKFosQ7rQ35viH_tAY%3D&ved=0CCgQyjdqFQoTCNKHjoiq48cCFVNaiAodqa0D0Q&ei=4qzsVdKOINO0oQSp246IDQ#imgrc=U6vTvzDrrfkcBM%3A&usg=__t6THhQzYAFKFosQ7rQ35viH_tAY%3D'>British Columbia</a> is another matter ...)</li>
<li> </li>
<li>Except for #3, they are all over-designed, with an attention to today's graphical fashions instead of any thought about what might stand the test of time. This is equivalent to saying that they call attention to the designer. (the koru design)</li>
</ul>What do you gain, designer of finalist #1, by flipping half of the silver fern image into negative, and making the frond leaflets more rounded so that they no longer resemble the plant? How is this better than the simple silver fern on black? Only that a graphic designer obviously designed it, in a way that is supposed to look cool.
But a flag is supposed to outlast its designer, and the design fashions of the moment. Remember, the Canadian flag was designed in the 1960s. If their design competition had been seeking something as "contemporary" and "designed" as New Zealand's final four, they might have found inspiration in one of these:
 
(Randon psychedelia)
 
 
Fortunately, they didn't. You can't tell, looking at the Canadian flag, that it's an artefact of the 1960s, and that's the whole point. A flag has to have a sense of timelessness and simplicity, which is why you must reject any design that calls attention to the cleverness of the designer or relies on design fashions of the moment. The creativity it requires begins with the willingness to disappear as the creator. None of the finalists displays this. 
How is this debate relevant to this blog's concerns in public transit? If you really want to sell public transit, teach people to count on it. Make it seem solid and enduring, not just sexy and ephemeral. Go for the simple, solid idea that will still make sense -- practically and aesthetically -- decades from now. 
 
(London Underground logo)
 
And this principle extends even beyond graphic design, to <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/the-disneyland-theory-of-transit.html'>debates about whether transit technologies should be chosen for "fun" or reliability</a>. 
Do you notice how insecure companies change their logos and liveries more often than confident ones do? Do you notice how they use flashy look-at-me images instead of clean and enduring ones? 
Flashiness, fun, and novelty may attract customers, but only simplicity and reliability retains them. Which message do you want to put forth about your transit system, or your country?
</blockquote>

Kirwan

Yeah, I've gone in a complete circle now. If we are going to change it has to be black with a properly designed silver fern or else just keep the current flag.
 
I'm also incredibly bored of the whole debate. Really sick of being told the process costs too much money, it's out flag for christs sake - we should spend more than ten bucks on our national image.

No Quarter

I struggle to believe black with a silver fern isn't at the very least one of the 4 options to vote from. I thought that would be a given, and the tough job would be choosing 3 other viable alternatives.

Crucial

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Kirwan" data-cid="514574" data-time="1441767817">
<div>
Yeah, I've gone in a complete circle now. If we are going to change it has to be black with a properly designed silver fern or else just keep the current flag.
 
I'm also incredibly bored of the whole debate. Really sick of being told the process costs too much money, it's out flag for christs sake - we should spend more than ten bucks on our national image.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
 
Hasn't they designer of the ABs fern offered to do a re-design for the flag that wouldn't infringe copyright?
 
 
I do think a lot of the problem is that the ABs copyrighted the concept with a very well designed and timeless version making it harder for other similar ones to look good.
 
If this guy reckons he can do it then give him a shot.
 
I don't get the argument from the panel that it is too associated with sport. Sports took the symbol because it was our symbol not the other way around.
 
The NZRU only own their particular version, they have fought for and lost the attempt to copyright the white fern on black as a general image.

taniwharugby

isn't that the reason we are the New Zealand All Blacks now?
 
There have been some pretty sh!tty versions of the Silver Fern over the years too...

Virgil

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="No Quarter" data-cid="514576" data-time="1441768027">
<div>
I struggle to believe black with a silver fern isn't at the very least one of the 4 options to vote from. I thought that would be a given, and the tough job would be choosing 3 other viable alternatives.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Is that due to the NZRU owning the rights to the Silverfern? (at least the way it looks on the blac back ground)
 
It would honestly be the only design i would vote Yes to.

taniwharugby

I believe they own the rights to THIER silverfern.

red terror

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="514590" data-time="1441770555">
<div>
isn't that the reason we are the New Zealand All Blacks now?
 
There have been some pretty sh!tty versions of the Silver Fern over the years too...
</div>
</blockquote>
 
From memory it was about 1986, I think, pre-RWC, but possibly post-Cavaliers (-- I really should look this up --) fern emblem on AB jersey added "New Zealand All Blacks," and again foggy memory, they added it to protect the brand. I guess the idea was anybody could manufacture a black jersey and slap a fern on it, or use it in advertising, and NZRU wouldn't get recompensed (and of course they'd already entered into a jersey sponsorship by that time with Steinlager.) (Were they terrified the Cavaliers were going to run out in SA wearing a black jersey with a silver fern and calling themselves the "Cavaliers"...? Hmmm...). Would be interesting to dig out the old Rugby News' and revisit...

taniwharugby

ha my bad, I meant when they removed the NZ part and became just the ABs, which was more recent.

The Silver Fern

Flag