But...you can make them, for free even.

Looking a lot better, but any client will tell you that these aren't what they were asking for   Take a look at some popular graphic designs, i.e. band logos or browse deviantART for them, and try to imitate their design; it's no good for professional work (unless you're purposefully attempting a parody), but it is good practice.

I refuse to cooperate.

If wish even this was true.  All of our tax money goes into paying off the interest on debts accrued to fund welfare and roads and military.  Private gains, public losses, that's the name of the game for the states and the banks hovering over them.

Get as many as you can.  There will be a point in time where owning an entire Bitcoin is an accomplishment.

Have you seen this video yet?  It might shed some light on the whole economic collapse thing.

As for the other point; nobody gives us any kind of life but us, we work to give ourselves a good life.  All "they" do is take credit.  Society shapes their government, not the other way around.  Somalia wasn't a paradise with a government, it's about as bad as it was without.

I've always found shallowness rather awkward, personally.

Excellent work

Wow, I had no idea we had such a diverse community here.  Greetings from Texas

I've come to the conclusion that government is merely a reflection of people; though it can often contribute to creating people in a certain image, ultimately it's people who define their government and if they decide that schools as they are are fine, then that's how they'll be, whether or not they're detrimental.  Another side-effect of rational thought is people taking an incredible interest in politics, as you and I are both anarchists and can attest to

I don't believe it necessarily has to be forced education however; I believe children are naturally curious individuals, though they have their own ways of learning.  It's better to foster their natural curiosity than try to push it out to reinforce an ideology; I can't say a person who wants to understand the "why" of everything can ever change without being punished for it.  Of course I'm only speaking of the right now, where we have to adapt to an authoritative environment, but in an anarcho-capitalist environment, people, including children, are free to go to school or not; the schools adapt entirely to what the market asks for, and in a society where everyone is rational, they're going to want the best schools whose sole focus is to train a person to think, young or old--assuming this is the best method of schooling.  This all works out great since everyone's intelligent enough to at least function in such an environment; in order for anarchism to work, it necessitates secular rationalism; without this, it's always doomed to fail, as non-rationals inevitably revert to seeking guidance from someone who is, or at least claims to be in the case of many rulers.  So there's no worry about anarcho-capitalists being unable to raise children properly, the schools just provide a more quality service.  Until this point in time, however, changes have to be made outside of the system, which then are reflected into government; this is why it takes so long for these shifts to occur.  So long as the Internet remains open and people see a reason to favor rationality over all else, which they primarily are exposed to through the Internet, the gradual shift is toward liberty and anarchy, not away.  It's a slow start, if we count the first anarchists, but it's definitely accelerating.

There are multiple problems with this design; for one, and this is the biggest problem, it's not attractive; when people see a design, it must draw them into it and make them want to understand the product in question more.  There are many ways to attract a person; one way is through beauty.  So what is beauty?  There is beauty in symmetry; I can find no symmetry in this design, the words "art shop" are small and misaligned with "Mike's", it's not uniform.  The image size itself is also a problem; the whole logo is shifted away from any identifiable center, not to mention all the blank space where the logo doesn't inhabit.  There is beauty in uniformity; neither the top half of the logo or the bottom half of the logo agree; one wants to be outspoken and chaotic, the other wants to refined and pleasant.  However, there is also beauty in compliment; a pairing which opposes each other can often be beautiful, for example, if the bottom half wanted to be the polar opposite of the top half, or perhaps in opposing colors.  These two do not fit well together.  There is beauty in organization; neither the top half or the bottom half want to agree on where they should be placed, and even if they aren't uniform, they should follow some logical reasoning for why they are placed where they are, which I cannot see in this design.  Sometimes designs follow a pattern of shape, or line; sometimes they want to be symbolic.  There's no organization being expressed in this design.

The next problem, which will vary from person to person, is the theme; I tend to work with art that's often quirky and dark, but this logo doesn't bring such qualities out; I would've liked something perhaps in a red/black pattern, maybe a tinge of blue, something with a limited pallet or some kind of pattern that way, in a more refined, square, and "individualistic" typeset; the fonts given here do not say "This is Mike", they seem to say, "This is Altitude"; when creating a design for a person, you must let go of your own image and succumb to the image your client is attempting to portray.  In this case, I can't say this is anywhere close to how my artwork is; I'm seeking something more elegant, but odd; something smooth but unusual; something which might be described as "bohemian".

My advice on where to go from here is to scrap this version entirely, take out a pencil and paper (or just type it somewhere), brainstorm on what you believe my intentions are for this logo and see if you can't come to a conclusion as to how this logo should turn out; give your sense of intuition a workout.  Look up examples on the web for various designs, especially ones which catch your eye; remember, if you don't like what you're making, there's not a lot of hope anyone else will.  You must be your own worst critic before you can ever hope to create something that will appeal to others.

I'll be waiting for your next attempt   Make sure you refer to those tutorials and try your hand at drawing; it'll help, believe me.

Just tried logging in; seems to be working for me.

All the time!

I'll have to think about this more; I really do believe we're arriving at the same conclusions, just with a different viewpoint.  Anyway, I'd like to believe there's an effective method of drawing people toward rational thought; so far, the fastest way I know of is to instill such a foundation in a person's childhood, in place of what would've went there, i.e. bogeymen and authorities, such as God or the state, to conquer them.  This seems a gradual shift, as parents will either raise their children with the beliefs and mannerism they were raised with, or those parents went through life-changing events before having kids and made a conscious decision not to raise their kids in the same way.  So this change must occur in adulthood before it can be passed onto children.

The second method would be through changes in education; if a child is taught not how to listen and conform, thus forming a dependency on getting all their knowledge from schools, but instead taught how to learn and thus capable of seeking wisdom on their own (libraries have always been around and now with the Internet, it's a trivial matter to learn anything), the child will be able to draw their own informed conclusions on reality, which should remain in-line with what rational thinkers believe.  Again, for the school system to change, people must accept that it is need of improvement, which also begins with adults.  Which is why I point out, once there is a majority of rational thinkers in any given society, the effect the rational can have is multiplied greatly; so long as we are divided, we're easily conquered.  One thing that makes the internet such a great technology, IMO

Ha ha well, you may have a point there.  However, I bring this up because, though these arguments make sense to us, they don't seem to have an effect on the people they're geared toward; someone who believes in God may not be completely irrational, but they are at least irrational toward the idea of God; so if the only use of an argument is to appeal to someone who already has a foundation in logical reasoning, thereby allowing the individual doubt on the existence of God, is it valuable?  If not, it would seem, then, that a focus on refuting God is not important; a focus on cultivating rational thinkers matters more.  It's like speaking two different languages; one speaks logic, the other doesn't.  For any of this to make sense to a believer of God, they first need to understand why rational thought is preferable to faith, and if they are rational thinkers, they will already agree with the argument.

This is why I bring up the idea of God being useful; if people can find a use in God, for whatever purpose, and they're surrounded by people who also believe God has a use, then God will continue to exist outside the purview of rationals; if rationals are a minority, then it is far more common for God to exist than for God to not exist; whether or not we can argue God's existence, if people don't have rational thought as their fundamental interpretation of the world, it doesn't matter if what is said makes logical sense if it cannot appeal to the people who are going to wind up changing your life in some way or another, whether through politics or otherwise.  Because of this, the only way to stop the existence of God--and he does exist, for God has and is making a huge impact on the world, albeit only through his believers--is with secular rationalism, thereby ending God's usefulness; a person can't get away with murder "in the name of God" if society doesn't believe there is a God, nor can a person rule by divine right, nor can a person ask forgiveness an infinite amount of times, knowing they must be forgiven for they are God-fearing; though we, i.e. rationals, can argue God isn't real, he's very much alive and well in his believers and always willing to exert his omnipotence--and by that I mean, people are with God as their backing.  There is no use in pointing out God's existence, then; there is only a use in helping people to accept a rational mindset; it is from there they can then understand God's existence.

And then suddenly, an influx of graphic designers.

Thanks for keying me in; however, how does this change the mind of a person who believes in God?

Your activity increases by 14 points every 2 weeks so long as:

1. You have more posts than your activity count
2. You post within that 2 week period at least once

How would this help the church?

Tiny amounts of Bitcoin are potentially being used to track who owns which addresses.