Does Not Illustrate: Lego Genetics

Page image was removed by E Kono Mai without thread on the grounds that it wasn't relevant. Counter argument stands that the series follows genetic science and biology poorly through Solid and Liquid being altered whimsically (hence parody image noting they have recessive and dominant genes swapped equally).

Regardless, it's typical for a thread be made instead of immediate and outright removal. Thoughts?

Agree with removal, that image doesn't clarify anything IMO.

To my understanding, this trope is about adding or removing traits on existing beings like Lego blocks, which the image doesn't illustrate. To do it on clones, at their creation, I'm not sure is the trope.

Gah, I hate those Hiimdaisy pics...I agree with the pull, it really doesn't indicate the trope at all.

This pic does not seem to illustrate this trope. Maybe another genetics trope, but not this one.

This should be "Changed without discussion", but it doesn't illustrate either. Leave it off.

Since general consensus is against it, I'll re-remove it.

I could have sworn that this page used to have another image, and I was right! It was a Visual Pun that changed without discussion.

I would swap that back in.

*snerk* Can we get a better quality version of that one?

edited 16th Oct '13 7:01:16 AM by Willbyr

:D

Here's◊ a close-up of the DNA structure in the pic...can't find a bigger version of the one with the girl in it.

GIS has a ton of cool options for "LEGO DNA" if we want to shoot for something else entirely, such as◊ these◊.

Does that really illustrate the trope, though, if we don't see any instance of people "modifying" the DNA?

Maybe not, but Rule of Funny works when a straight image is hard to come by (eg: Flying Brick).

The webcomic section has this◊ example. I think the 2nd and 3rd last panel illustrates the trope quite well.

^^^ Illustrating the trope is not the goal of using a Visual Pun as a page image.

Technically, the old picture illustrates "Chemistry" more than "LEGO Genetics" but I give it a pass under Rule of Funny.

So-so on the webcomic suggestion.

Can work if arranged vertically. The art style doesn't do it any favours, though.

edited 17th Oct '13 2:55:08 AM by AnotherDuck

I agree with your remark on the art styles, but I have certain concerns about Visual Puns having the tendency to be overly literal and don't really explain or illustrate the trope. @8 is better than most examples, but an actual example would work better as a page image, methinks.

I have to agree with the Duck, I'm not crazy about the artwork in that example at all.

The webcomic's lines doesn't look pretty, and even though artstyle's normally not a concern here, this picture could be decrided for Poor Image if that was the page image.

I gets a few minus points for Heavy stylized drawing styles and relying on text. It does illustrate the trope, so...

I kinda wonder if it would help to resize that back and forth once, to see if the jagged edges in the text become better... I also wonder if it would be better to remove the two small panels and centre the top one, so get rid of some clutter. They don't add anything.

I re-re-sized it and then sharpened it(was to blurry otherwise). Didn't really get any better. It's too heavily stylized.

on the lego close-up.

The comic is terrible, the LEGO model is funny.

"Does it illustrate the trope?" is only one of dozens of concerns. It is probably the first and foremost concern, but the suggestion is to ignore that entirely, not demote its importance. "It doesn't illustrate" is an invalid criticism, it's not supposed to.

edited 17th Oct '13 4:36:16 PM by rodneyAnonymous