Graffiti tag SKU

Seanachai

Does anybody know what the graffiti tag 'SKU' means , a friend is having problems with local scrotes and they sprayed a nickname that his son has on his wall and also wrote 'SKU' beneath it.

chopper6

Seanachai wrote: »

Does anybody know what the graffiti tag 'SKU' means , a friend is having problems with local scrotes and they sprayed a nickname that his son has on his wall and also wrote 'SKU' beneath it.

Maybe they misspelled something...SKUm maybe?

I dunno you can never tell with scumbags.

Lovely Bloke

I can't wait for the "they are misunderstood artists" crowd to descend. Yipee-doo.

These imbeciles who deface and maim both public and private property should be locked up.

rovoagho

Maim? Are the walls bleeding?

Catchy slogan for NIMBYs: Taggers Maim

Right up there with Speed Kills by the gormless liars in the RSA.

NBTD

Urban dictionary reckons its a racist slur

Yet another racial slur against black people. A slur that the black people don't know yet so you can use it in front of them. It comes about due to the fact that they do not know how to properly say "school" They say "sku"
Ex1:That sku over there needs to pull up his goddamn pants.

Ex2:Goddamn Skus

Source:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=sku

Teyla Emmagan

The Guards might recognise it. I hope your mate finds out who it is. And that they somehow have all their fingers broken.

Lovely Bloke

rovoagho wrote: »

Maim? Are the walls bleeding?

Catchy slogan for NIMBYs: Taggers Maim

Right up there with Speed Kills by the gormless liars in the RSA.

thanks for dropping by.

bumper234

rovoagho wrote: »

Maim? Are the walls bleeding?

Catchy slogan for NIMBYs: Taggers Maim

Right up there with Speed Kills by the gormless liars in the RSA.

So speed doesn't kill and graffiti is a pleasure to look at?

chopper6

rovoagho wrote: »

Maim? Are the walls bleeding?

Catchy slogan for NIMBYs: Taggers Maim

Right up there with Speed Kills by the gormless liars in the RSA.

"Taggers"=Yellow-bellied vandals..let them.do it on thier mother's house as none of them actually own anything themselves.

Seanachai

It must be this one ,

"School, used by uneducated borderline mentally disabled urbanites who can't spell out the word "School" in its entirety. This is most likely due to the whole "Sch" sound that they are unable to transfer from vocal use to print.
"Sku is almost pau so itz tyme to parT"


the kid has learning problems. If you knew how things worked in my neck of the woods and knew who we suspect did this going to the guards would be futile. One of the offenders can do no wrong in the eyes of a lot of people but has caused a lot of problems for some people.

It's basically part of ongoing hostility because the kids father had the nerve to stand up to one of these guys who is now 24-25. He has an amazing way of covering his tracks and getting gullible people on his side. I've a feeling his karma might be running out though as he's getting to the age where he's no longer considered a 'Young fella' and someone will eventually put serious manners on him.

rovoagho

I didn't say a word about the skills of taggers or the prettiness of their work; stop reading between the lines, I don't write between them. I simply believe that referring to it as "maiming" is utterly ridiculous, much akin to that old favourite of the Oirish meeja: "carnage on our roads". (Which is in addition patently untrue, because, you know, facts.)

But denying that some tags are pretty or skilful in their implementation is simply unrealistic. Good graffiti is admitedly rare in Ireland, and most taggers are clueless buffoons that could find their own arses with both hands, but it is out there. You know how much a Banksy goes for, right? If you can't see the talent, humour and/or intelligence in some of his work, you're simply dead inside.

Writing off all wall art because of the work of a few literal morons just demonstrates an inability to appreciate art, full-stop.

Lovely Bloke

rovoagho wrote: »

But denying that some tags are pretty or skilful in their implementation is simply unrealistic.

It's a pity they don't do it on the walls of their parent's houses though, instead of defacing private and public property, and not paying for it to be cleaned up.

This costs either the government or businesses money to remove, but typical of the subculture who say that it's "pretty" or "skilful" they are unwilling to take personal responsibility for it, instead they prefer to live in a cocoon where they are "sticking to the man hur-de-hur" and have appointed themselves as the sole arbiters as to what behaviour is socially or morally acceptable.

I don't give a fiddler's fart is Leonardo Da Vinci himself paints The Mona Lisa II on my wall, the wall of a bank in town, or a wall maintained by the council, they should fine the fúcker for the cost of cleaning it off, or else throw him in gaol if he persists in his reprehensible, socially retarded behaviour.

It's that simple. Aesthetics do not come into it. The destruction of public and/or private property is the actual discussion here.

Something that these morons, and their apologists, conveniently ignore.

rovoagho

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

I don't give a fiddler's fart is Leonardo Da Vinci himself paints The Mona Lisa II on my wall

Sorry, but balls. I'm not saying that Banksy is the modern-day equivalent of Leo, not by a long shot, but if he defaced your house, you could sell the house and buy two with the proceeds. If you stopped him, you'd be a moral Mother Teresa, and a fool.

https://www.google.ie/search?q=banksy+sells+for

tricky D

Mod note: posts about speeding are off topic and have been deleted. Back on topic please, thanks.

lolosaur

they are initials.

septic kerry underpants is my best guess.

lolosaur

It's not the school definition. Irish people arent clever enough for that.

Tasden

Initials beside a tag is usually their "crew", they all have a 'tag'- their art name or whatever way you wanna describe it- but then they belong to a crew, sometimes spelt krew, so they tag the crews name too. You see UEK around Dublin alot, think grift was in uek can't remember, and NDK I think is another big one in Dublin. If its kids thinking they're artists then its more than likely a crew tag.

(Interest in street art as a previous art student btw, not a vandal :pac: )

Lovely Bloke

The term "Street Art" is ridiculous.

It's wanton destruction of property, and criminal damage, so stop dressing it up as something it's not.

alastair

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

It's that simple. Aesthetics do not come into it. The destruction of public and/or private property is the actual discussion here.

Something that these morons, and their apologists, conveniently ignore.

Which property has been 'destroyed' by graffiti or street art? I can understand it's considered an unwelcome imposition for some, and certainly a nuisance to remove, but the 'destruction' of property? Really?

Tasden

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

The term "Street Art" is ridiculous.

It's wanton destruction of property, and criminal damage, so stop dressing it up as something it's not.

Its not dressing it up, its the term attributed to it when learning about it in an art context. Whether you feel its worthy of the term art or not is your prerogative. And I don't actually agree with illegal street art or graffiti fwiw, I just don't get hung up on the terms used to describe it when learning about it.

Aard

There's a wall behind Ormonde Square dedicated to street art, as part of Dublin City Beta, if anybody is interested...

bumper234

alastair wrote: »

Which property has been 'destroyed' by graffiti or street art? I can understand it's considered an unwelcome imposition for some, and certainly a nuisance to remove, but the 'destruction' of property? Really?

One mans Unwelcome imposition is another mans ****ing eyesore!

Lovely Bloke

alastair wrote: »

Which property has been 'destroyed' by graffiti or street art? I can understand it's considered an unwelcome imposition for some, and certainly a nuisance to remove, but the 'destruction' of property? Really?

You read the OP didn't you

Seanachai wrote: »

Does anybody know what the graffiti tag 'SKU' means , a friend is having problems with local scrotes and they sprayed a nickname that his son has on his wall and also wrote 'SKU' beneath it.

Scrawling a "tag" on someone's wall is destruction of property, and criminal damage to private property. That's graffiti.

You may not agree, but the law is the law.

Another "Stick it to the man" hippie on our hands. Good stuff.

Look, I've no issue with commissioned pieces done in a "street art" style, or when it's done in a dedicated place like the one mentioned above, but when these assholes think they are above the law and take it upon themselves to impose their "art" on us, that's when I have a problem with it.

alastair

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

You read the OP didn't you

Scrawling a "tag" on someone's wall is destruction of property, and criminal damage to private property. That's graffiti.

You may not agree, but the law is the law.

I'm not asking about the law - that's clear enough. The thing is, Criminal Damage doesn't actually require the destruction of anything. And I'm still not seeing any evidence for the 'destruction of property' you (not the OP) claim is the core issue relating to graffiti.

bumper234

alastair wrote: »

I'm not asking about the law - that's clear enough. The thing is, Criminal Damage doesn't actually require the destruction of anything. And I'm still not seeing any evidence for the 'destruction of property' you (not the OP) claim is the core issue relating to graffiti.

If I have a car, house, wall, fence and some scrote "tags" it then I consider it "destroyed" in the sense that it is damaged and needs renovating to get it back to its original condition. Is it "destroyed" beyond repair? More than likely not but that does not make criminal damage ok!

tricky D

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

Another "Stick it to the man" hippie on our hands. Good stuff.

Less of that please, attack post not poster, thanks.

rovoagho

Once again, that's not what I said; in fact it's not even remotely close to what I said. Sorry, but I'm not going to respond to you while you continue to (completely!) misinterpret and/or take my posts out of context

Apologies to all other for taking the thread off-topic,that wasn't my intention.

chopper6

Tasden wrote: »

Its not dressing it up, its the term attributed to it when learning about it in an art context.I just don't get hung up on the terms used to describe it when learning about it.

People actually "learn about it" in college?

Proof positive that irish third level is a disgrace...at the very least they should bring back fees and put an end to this sort of nonsense.

Sulla Felix

Tagging is one thing, street art is another. They both come under the definition of graffiti but pretending they're one and the same is sensationalist nonsense.

Tasden

chopper6 wrote: »

People actually "learn about it" in college?

Proof positive that irish third level is a disgrace...at the very least they should bring back fees and put an end to this sort of nonsense.

Didn't study art at third level so I don't know. And learning about something doesn't necessarily mean students are being taught about something as part of their course content/curriculum- different techniques/forms/styles are discussed and looked into/learned about, street art is sometimes one of them.

rovoagho

It also depends on your definition of tagging though. There's a big difference between the squiggles wackers do simply because they can't spell their own names, and the big colorful ones done by people with actual talent. I'd consider the latter both street art and tagging.

Location is also a huge factor, but I guess that brings us full circle.

Mr Simpson

I've removed one post that specifically mentioned a family by name. This is not acceptable, no matter how well known the family may be to Gardaí

kylith

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

I can't wait for the "they are misunderstood artists" crowd to descend. Yipee-doo.

These imbeciles who deface and maim both public and private property should be locked up.

I wouldn't go that far, but they should spend a lot of time repainting defaced walls.

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

Look, I've no issue with commissioned pieces done in a "street art" style, or when it's done in a dedicated place like the one mentioned above, but when these assholes think they are above the law and take it upon themselves to impose their "art" on us, that's when I have a problem with it.

Likewise. The pieces that are actually art are beautiful, but these idiots just tagging everywhere are fcking awful. It's not art, it's a pissing contest, and those engaged in it need a good boot up the hole.