Help TRY and prevent the death of an innocent dog...

Just got a random invitation on facebook to a group surrounding this, and I had never heard of this before.

Apparently some asshat decided it was artistic to take a dog, leash him up at an exhibit and let him starve. Of course the dog died the day after he got taken out of the exhibit.

The disgusting thing is he is being invited to do it again:

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Artist-Leaves-Dog-To-Die-on-Exhibition-Display-82091.shtml

http://www.euroweeklynews.com/news/6831.html

At this point I don't care if it is futile, I am going to sign the petitions and hope that something comes of them. This is absolutely ridiculous and pretty much shows how much of a joke modern art has become....

http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/petition-sign.cgi?13031953

http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/petition-sign.cgi?ea6gk

thats disgusting, i can't believe they let him do that the first time around, isn't it illegal or something?

for some reason it says my email address isn't valid.

I wonder how this can be considered art.

I wonder how this can be considered art.

Dracargen

His lame explaination is in the first link.

He claims it symbolizes the suffering all dogs go through or some crap like that....

Is there any reliable source that verifies the dog actually died? Because after seeing this, I searched Google for news articles and it seems likely the dog actually was not starved...

http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?Article=214619&Sn=BNEW&IssueID=31026

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/art/news/story/0,,2269320,00.html

Actually, your own article even says that it is alleged the dog was fed, but there is no verifiction for that, which clearly implies there is no verification that it died either. The whole thing seems to be based on....a chain email? Yeah, we know how reliable those are...

Is there any reliable source that verifies the dog actually died? Because after seeing this, I searched Google for news articles and it seems likely the dog actually was not starved...

http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?Article=214619&Sn=BNEW&IssueID=31026

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/art/news/story/0,,2269320,00.html

Actually, your own article even says that it is alleged the dog was fed, but there is no verifiction for that, which clearly implies there is no verification that it died either. The whole thing seems to be based on....a chain email? Yeah, we know how reliable those are...

SpaceMoose

Do you actually expect me to take the artists word for it when in other articles it clearly states that people complained about the exhibit and demanded it be stopped and yet the artists is denying it?

kill the dog...i don't give a rat's ass abt tht creatureRaged-wolverine

Do you actually expect me to take the artists word for it when in other articles it clearly states that people complained about the exhibit and demanded it be stopped and yet the artists is denying it?

LostProphetFLCL

The only thing the article clearly said is that there was an email going around about it and a petition. Who saw the dead dog? Name one person or news organization. Just one. Just because the exhibit might have said the dog was starving doesn't mean it actually was... That would be what would make it "art," after all: making a point via something that is not really true.

If chain emails count as sources now, then I truly give up.

kill the dog...i don't give a rat's ass abt tht creatureRaged-wolverine

Ya very nice thing to say, real mature :roll:

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

Do you actually expect me to take the artists word for it when in other articles it clearly states that people complained about the exhibit and demanded it be stopped and yet the artists is denying it?

SpaceMoose

The only thing the article clearly said is that there was an email going around about it and a petition. Who saw the dead dog? Name one person or news organization. Just one. Just becuase the exhibit might have said the dog was starving doesn't mean it actually was... That would be what would make it "art," after all: making a point via something that is not really true.

I didn't even read your first link because that is a software download site, not a news site, for God's sake.

If chain emails count as sources now, then I truly give up.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

Do you actually expect me to take the artists word for it when in other articles it clearly states that people complained about the exhibit and demanded it be stopped and yet the artists is denying it?

SpaceMoose

The only thing the article clearly said is that there was an email going around about it and a petition. Who saw the dead dog? Name one person or news organization. Just one. Just because the exhibit might have said the dog was starving doesn't mean it actually was... That would be what would make it "art," after all: making a point via something that is not really true.

If chain emails count as sources now, then I truly give up.

I gave two different sources myself and they weren't from a chain-mail....

Well, it appears the whole thing was a hoax. The dog was only tied up for the exhibition and was released, alive and fed. Apparently, the artist was just making some cynical social commentary. Too bad the only thing people will remember about the exhibition is the douchebag responsible for it. Although, to be fair, the message of the art was decided by the spectators' inaction, not by the artist. Maybe he was expecting them to help the dog.luccaface

That's pretty much what I got out of it.

kill the dog...i don't give a rat's ass abt tht creatureRaged-wolverine

You're next.

I gave two different sources myself and they weren't from a chain-mail....

LostProphetFLCL

The only one of those links I read (the one that was not from a software download site...), says right in the first line that there is a number of emails going around... :lol:

That is like the oldest tabloid trick in the book. Just say that someone said something. It doesn't matter if the thing that they said is actually true, as long as it's true that someone said it, which in this case is some emails, apparently.

Well, it appears the whole thing was a hoax. The dog was only tied up for the exhibition and was released, alive and fed. Apparently, the artist was just making some cynical social commentary. Too bad the only thing people will remember about the exhibition is the douchebag responsible for it. Although, to be fair, the message of the art was decided by the spectators' inaction, not by the artist. Maybe he was expecting them to help the dog.luccaface

Really wow he got me.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

I gave two different sources myself and they weren't from a chain-mail....

SpaceMoose

The only one of those links I read (the one that was not from a software download site...), says right in the first line that there is an email that is going around... :lol:

Yes there may be an e-mail going around but its NOT where I got it from and as mentioned those were both links about the story.

so its ok to watch one sided sadistical actions for entertainment, if theres written a teeny weeny note that you gotta REALLY look after next to it saying "dog isnt starving lol"?biBLioTek

Not all art is meant for "entertainment." It's more of a case of the artist making a social commentary, and I doubt he did it by actually starving the dog, especially since it was actually in a museum. That just seems a bit hard to swallow.

[QUOTE="SpaceMoose"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

I gave two different sources myself and they weren't from a chain-mail....

LostProphetFLCL

The only one of those links I read (the one that was not from a software download site...), says right in the first line that there is an email that is going around... :lol:

Yes there may be an e-mail going around but its NOT where I got it from and as mentioned those were both links about the story.

No, it's not where YOU got it from...directly. It's where Euro Weekly News apparently got it from. It's not really that hard of a concept to grasp, is it?

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"][QUOTE="SpaceMoose"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

I gave two different sources myself and they weren't from a chain-mail....

SpaceMoose

The only one of those links I read (the one that was not from a software download site...), says right in the first line that there is an email that is going around... :lol:

Yes there may be an e-mail going around but its NOT where I got it from and as mentioned those were both links about the story.

No, it's not where YOU got it from...directly. It's where Euro Weekly News apparently got it from. It's not really that hard of a concept to grasp, is it?

lol wow so they mention it had appeared in e-mails and that suddenly makes it their source?

They simply mentioned the chain mail. I don't see how mentioning a chain-mail in regards to a story makes it the source.

lol wow so they mention it had appeared in e-mails and that suddenly makes it their source?

They simply mentioned the chain mail. I don't see how mentioning a chain-mail in regards to a story makes it the source.

LostProphetFLCL

Okay. What is that article's source that the dog died? (Especially when they admit themselves right in the article that it's unconfirmed if the dog is alive or not...)

[QUOTE="SpaceMoose"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"][QUOTE="SpaceMoose"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

I gave two different sources myself and they weren't from a chain-mail....

LostProphetFLCL

The only one of those links I read (the one that was not from a software download site...), says right in the first line that there is an email that is going around... :lol:

Yes there may be an e-mail going around but its NOT where I got it from and as mentioned those were both links about the story.

No, it's not where YOU got it from...directly. It's where Euro Weekly News apparently got it from. It's not really that hard of a concept to grasp, is it?

lol wow so they mention it had appeared in e-mails and that suddenly makes it their source?

They simply mentioned the chain mail. I don't see how mentioning a chain-mail in regards to a story makes it the source.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

lol wow so they mention it had appeared in e-mails and that suddenly makes it their source?

They simply mentioned the chain mail. I don't see how mentioning a chain-mail in regards to a story makes it the source.

SpaceMoose

Okay. What is that article's source?

Do you not understand that ARTICLES ARE THE SOURCE!!!

They report on events that happen and record them so we can source those articles later.

Jesus Christ man....

[QUOTE="SpaceMoose"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

lol wow so they mention it had appeared in e-mails and that suddenly makes it their source?

They simply mentioned the chain mail. I don't see how mentioning a chain-mail in regards to a story makes it the source.

LostProphetFLCL

Okay. What is that article's source?

Do you not understand that ARTICLES ARE THE SOURCE!!!

They report on events that happen and record them so we can source those articles later.

Jesus Christ man....

Do you not understand that ARTICLES ARE THE SOURCE!!!

They report on events that happen and record them so we can source those articles later.

Jesus Christ man....

LostProphetFLCL

So, they type something, and merely by virtue of them having typed it...that makes it TRUE.

Epic lulz, sir. Epic lulz.

And yet there are no interview quotes or any effort made to contact any of the principals involved, nor is there any information in the "story" that is not in the chain emails. None of this makes for credible journalism.xaos

But they typed it and they have a website with the word "news" right in it!

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"][QUOTE="SpaceMoose"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

lol wow so they mention it had appeared in e-mails and that suddenly makes it their source?

They simply mentioned the chain mail. I don't see how mentioning a chain-mail in regards to a story makes it the source.

xaos

Okay. What is that article's source?

Do you not understand that ARTICLES ARE THE SOURCE!!!

They report on events that happen and record them so we can source those articles later.

Jesus Christ man....

If you haven't actually gotten the e-mail then you need to jsut stop, because I don't see any other way that you would actually know what exactly is stated in the chain mail.

I will admit it isn't the most credible journalism, but at the same time you guys do realize that interviews can be BS'd so easily it isn't even funny, especially when you see those reaction quotes from random people....

And Spacemoose, this story is obviously being posted by a few sites. That is good reason to take it as credible. Man you even posted 2 of the links yourself!!!

Epic fail right there.

First splatters are considered million dollar pieces, then dying dogs are considered art? What next, throwing crap at people? :|Fire_Ants

I couldn't help but notice that your name is a close anagram of "Fine_Arts," which is rather apropo.

If you haven't actually gotten the e-mail then you need to jsut stop, because I don't see any other way that you would actually know what exactly is stated in the chain mail.

I will admit it isn't the most credible journalism, but at the same time you guys do realize that interviews can be BS'd so easily it isn't even funny, especially when you see those reaction quotes from random people....

And Spacemoose, this story is obviously being posted by a few sites. That is good reason to take it as credible. Man you even posted 2 of the links yourself!!!

Epic fail right there.

LostProphetFLCL

And not one of them could come up with any credible evidence to the dog having actually died.

Am I honestly to believe that multiple museums would actually allow a dog to be starved to death on their premises in the name of art, just based on speculation that the dog really did starve?

Ironically, all of this attention is surely exactly what the artist in question wants, to illustrate how people care more about a dog than all of the starving people in the world. That is, in fact, his entire point. (Don't get me wrong though. If he really is starving dogs, the guy is a complete something-I'd-get-suspended-for-saying.)

kill the dog...i don't give a rat's ass abt tht creatureRaged-wolverine

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

If you haven't actually gotten the e-mail then you need to jsut stop, because I don't see any other way that you would actually know what exactly is stated in the chain mail.

I will admit it isn't the most credible journalism, but at the same time you guys do realize that interviews can be BS'd so easily it isn't even funny, especially when you see those reaction quotes from random people....

And Spacemoose, this story is obviously being posted by a few sites. That is good reason to take it as credible. Man you even posted 2 of the links yourself!!!

Epic fail right there.

SpaceMoose

And not one of them could come up with any credible evidence to the dog having actually died.

Am I honestly to believe that multiple museums would actually allow a dog to be starved to death on their premises in the name of art, just based on speculation that the dog really did starve?

With the sad state the art world is in it is very possible.

Come on, you think this would have made any impact or gotten any attention if it weren't for the controversy surrounding starving a dog?

Bad publicity is still publicity and it is giving those involved attention.

[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"][QUOTE="SpaceMoose"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

lol wow so they mention it had appeared in e-mails and that suddenly makes it their source?

They simply mentioned the chain mail. I don't see how mentioning a chain-mail in regards to a story makes it the source.

LostProphetFLCL

Okay. What is that article's source?

Do you not understand that ARTICLES ARE THE SOURCE!!!

They report on events that happen and record them so we can source those articles later.

Jesus Christ man....

If you haven't actually gotten the e-mail then you need to jsut stop, because I don't see any other way that you would actually know what exactly is stated in the chain mail.

I will admit it isn't the most credible journalism, but at the same time you guys do realize that interviews can be BS'd so easily it isn't even funny, especially when you see those reaction quotes from random people....

And Spacemoose, this story is obviously being posted by a few sites. That is good reason to take it as credible. Man you even posted 2 of the links yourself!!!

Epic fail right there.