The Origami Forum

Hello and welcome to March!

The topic for this month is "ENDANGERED".

There are many animals you could do. You could do a Bengal Tiger, a Javan Rhino, a Bornean Orangutan, a Hector's Dolphin, a Hawksbill Turtle, Red and Giant Pandas, or a Beautiful Parachute Spider (real thing) for example.
But you don't have to limit yourself to animals (or other life forms)! You can also fold objects that used to be more common, but in today's modern world are seldom seen and/or often thrown away. For example, handwritten mail and analog clocks.

Edit: Here's come clarification:
For living things: design an orgainsm that is endangered on the IUCN evaluation system
For non-living objects: design an object that is rarely seen, and probably going to be seen less and less as time goes on.

You can interpret the subject in any way you like. I look forward to seeing everyone's entries!

Rules:
One uncut rectangle of paper. Substances like MC are fine, but avoid glue.

Tony Koppers will judge.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hope this topic is a good one that people can design many things from. I also had a second idea for this month — anthropomorphism — but I think I chose the better topic.

so here is a red panda:
red panda by sebastien limet, sur Flickr
one uncut square of duo thaï paper

So fast! Nice!

Nice design -sebl-! It fits the topic very well.

It's nothing unusual or bad to have only one entry in the first 10 days, but I hope that there are more people thinking about a design, so -sebl- will not win by default.

Does "Least Concern" count as endangered?

Here's a rather unique model I've never tried before. It is folded from a 25cm piece of kami, on a 40x40 grid. Normally I'd submit something later in the month, but I don't think I'll be having much time for origami during the next few weeks. Perhaps if I do I'll submit something more mainstream.

Unfortunately, with as the popularity of social media and texting in our modern society rises, the face to face conversations that used to be common are now becoming less and less common, especially for the Millennial generation.

Animals aren't the only things endangered nowadays. Pure, human, dialogue; something that used to be a societal norm, is now among one of the many behaviors that are disappearing quickly. While messaging instantly from miles away becomes higher tech and more realistic, travelling distances to see and talk to people in person is at risk of becoming more and more obsolete*.

That is why my model, Conversation, counts as "endangered."



*Not that I have anything against instant messaging. Perhaps in the future face to face conversations can be simulated to be just as good as real conversations, but nevertheless it will still become obsolete.

Edit: As Goldtiger pointed out, the letters of "Conversation" can be rearranged to form the word "conservation," which relates to endangered species.

Baltorigamist wrote:Does "Least Concern" count as endangered?

Im going to say yes. If it's on one of the lists, go ahead

@NeverCeaseToCrease Great design and interpretation. It's also just like that classic illusion that looks like two faces talking and a goblet/vase at the same time. Also, I don't know if you noticed, but the title — "Conversation" — is an anagram of "Conservation" which is also related to being endangered.

@Tony Koppers that's fine you're the judge, but here's why it might not actually count. Least Concern means the species has been evaluated by the IUCN, but do not qualify as vunerable, endangered, critically endangered, extinct in the wild, or extinct. Probably only the first four of those should be accepted. Otherwise you are basically accepting all species that are not extinct. But again, it's the judge's decision.

Goldtiger-997 wrote:
@Tony Koppers that's fine you're the judge, but here's why it might not actually count. Least Concern means the species has been evaluated by the IUCN, but do not qualify as vunerable, endangered, critically endangered, extinct in the wild, or extinct. Probably only the first four of those should be accepted. Otherwise you are basically accepting all species that are not extinct. But again, it's the judge's decision.

Ok, I clearly don't know how the lists work then.. you're right, goldtiger, least concern will not be accepted...

Goldtiger-997 wrote:Also, I don't know if you noticed, but the title — "Conversation" — is an anagram of "Conservation" which is also related to being endangered.

Ah, very clever! I'll pretend I noticed...

Interesting,
I believe this conservation began a few years ago - July 2011

Tony Koppers wrote:Ok, I clearly don't know how the lists work then.. you're right, goldtiger, least concern will not be accepted...

That's fine. I have another idea anyway.

Goldtiger-997 wrote: @Tony Koppers that's fine you're the judge, but here's why it might not actually count. Least Concern means the species has been evaluated by the IUCN, but do not qualify as vunerable, endangered, critically endangered, extinct in the wild, or extinct. Probably only the first four of those should be accepted. Otherwise you are basically accepting all species that are not extinct. But again, it's the judge's decision.

I highly disagree with this post. Not only are you being needlessly pedantic but you're violating the precise wording of your own challenge.

You can also fold objects that used to be more common, but in today's modern world are seldom seen and/or often thrown away.

If objects that are now seldom seen are allowed than you may simply consider an object as a member of a species that are seldom seen EVEN IF THEY ARE NOT ENDANGERED.

And also you are violating the spirit of your challenge. You deliberately cast a wide net allowing for wide interpretation on what it means. And now you would disqualify species that are not technically endangered?

I think you need to reconsider this.

DavidW wrote:
If objects that are now seldom seen are allowed than you may simply consider an object as a member of a species that are seldom seen EVEN IF THEY ARE NOT ENDANGERED.

The way I am reading the definition of least concern is that it means the IUCN thought they might need to place a species on a list, or that species was formerly on a more critical status, but upon evaluation, it was determined that said species either never needed or no longer needs any sort of help to remain alive. Based on this, least concern does not count as endangered. Something defined as threatened might count, despite this not being called endangered. However, if a species is common enough as to not require any outside help to avoid extinction, I don't think I can accept it. You are certainly correct in saying a "wide net" is desirable, it's just that after looking at the definitions, I think that least concern would fall outside of that wide net.

Tony Koppers wrote: The way I am reading the definition of least concern

This has nothing to do with that! Please read my post again.