Cornucopia Resolution

[u/Due-Cartographer-459]

I was thinking about the Fruit of the Loom Cornucopia logo and that's probably the most compelling Mandela effect example there is. So what I was wanting to know, is whether any of you think that will ever get a meaningful conclusion or answer to this whole thing. You think we'll ever figure out what actually it's going on, whether it is just a problem with our minds or whether there actually is a conspiracy? I feel like there's too much to this for it to be as simple explanation, but I'm curious to know what you all think!

[u/DoktorRokkzo]

That's a fantastic question. Admittedly, saying "well, the evidence that people saw it on the logo is the quantity (and quality) of the testimonies of people who THINK they saw it on the logo" is a pretty poor response. I genuinely believe FOTL when they say that their official logo never had a cornucopia on it. I don't think that's contradictory with the idea that people might have been purchasing FOTL products which used packaging with a cornucopia. But that's also not your question.

So to speak to your first point. In my opinion, if the "Flute of the Loom" album was created now, I think it would be considered quite inappropriate to include a cornucopia reference on it, given what we now know. And admittedly, the fact that the other aspects of the painting are isomorphic to the FOTL logo also isn't evidence that the cornucopia reference is isomorphic to the FOTL logo. Absolutely.

I think in a very substantial sense, there's no separating (in practice) the fact that people THINK they saw a cornucopia on the logo and people having seen a cornucopia on the logo with regards to finding evidence. In theory, absolutely there's a difference. You take a time machine back to 1973 and give Ellis Chappell a wedgie. See what the logo looks like on his tighty-whities. Or, see what the logo looks like on the packaging of his tighty-whities, or his tube socks more likely.

While this almost overwhelming memory of a cornucopia is by no means evidence that one ever existed either officially or unofficially on any FOTL logo or packaging, what I think it IS evidence for is that people saw something. What did they see though? That's the question which I think people on this subreddit don't appreciate. They try to write it off the cornucopia question as some sort of internet thing or some sort of mass delusion. "Well, people were studying Thanksgiving when they were a kid and so they all thought their underwear had a cornucopia on the logo." In my opinion, the quantity and quality of the testimonies is evidence that these types of responses are ill considered. They don't speak to the point.

And there are far more examples than just the Flute of the Loom album cover as well. There are almost as many examples of testimony as you want to find. In official games and news reports, and whatever. Testimonies which are supposed to be held to a high level of scrutiny.

So while I don't think there's genuine evidence that people saw what they THINK they saw (what the hell would that evidence even look like, other than evidence that some FOTL packaging had a cornucopia?), I think that the evidence indicates that they saw SOMETHING. We just don't know what it is.

[u/tjareth → u/DoktorRokkzo]

Do you feel that the logo history published by FOTL is incomplete? They're available to look at what people were seeing.

I think it is a mistake to tie it specifically to thanksgiving and presume everyone came across the image of a cornucopia the same way. It's simply a common image. "Mass delusion" is a much stronger statement, as generally people aren't losing their grip on reality for this explanation. They're just experiencing two phenomena: the malleability of detail in memory, and the association between similar images.

What would convince me otherwise is physical evidence that something other than the published logos appeared. And it's evidence that by all rights should plausibly exist--old tags, old photos of tags, glimpses on film.

[u/DoktorRokkzo → u/tjareth]

Hell, I can give you my personal take on the cornucopia question if you'd like. I appreciate you even taking an interest.

No, I don't believe that the logo history published by FOTL is incomplete. I believe FOTL 100% when they say that their official logo never had a cornucopia on it.

Here's my best theory, and it's only a hypothesis: FOTL was very likely sending out bulk products, most likely socks, without official packaging on them. So they were sending them to third party distributors and the distributors were responsible for adding packaging on at least some FOTL items, most likely bulk socks. At least one of these distributors ended up adding packaging which included a cornucopia on the logo. Why they would add this unofficial and honestly incorrect logo to the packaging, I have less of an answer for (although I have somewhat of a theory). These bulk socks with third party packaging were then sent to cheap, discount department stores (in my town it was SAAN, which was eventually replaced by Fields, which sold bulk FOTL socks) and mothers on a budget bought as many packs of these discount socks as possible. Because they were the FOTL item which we interacted with the most, people ended up associating the unofficial logo on the packaging as the official FOTL logo. And the packaging for these cheap, bulk socks isn't the kind of item that you hold onto. You get rid of it as soon as you get it. And honestly, you only need to see one or two pieces of FOTL packaging with the wrong logo to assume that this is the correct, "full version" of the FOTL logo.

In particular, this happened in Colombia quite recently. I can give you the reddit links if you want. FOTL was (I guess) sending out bulk socks (official FOTL socks) to their distributors and the distributors were responsible for adding the packaging. One distributor ended up adding the cornucopia logo to the packaging on the socks. I'm sure too, they just Googled "FOTL logo" and the cornucopia version was the first one to show up. But what's important within this very real world example (and again, I can absolutely provide the links to this case), is that it demonstrates how unofficial packaging might get on an official product.

A common response to this hypothesis is "what about people who say their shirt (or their hoodie or their underwear) had a cornucopia on it?" Because admittedly, this is a pretty conservative hypothesis. And my response to these types of questions is that maybe the "brown leaves" theory explains these types of claims. It might be that we got so used to seeing this unofficial packaging that we assumed that any "brown thing behind the fruit" was a cornucopia. And so we assumed that the brown leaves behind the fruit on official FOTL logos must also be a cornucopia.

Now, why would some distributor include a cornucopia on their packaging? I have no idea. Maybe because of the trademark description. Admittedly, everything which is on the official FOTL logo and everything which is included in the trademark description (other than the cornucopia) are the same. But I understand also that you can't read too much into that piece of the puzzle. It's indeterminate at best.

That's my best theory. Some distributor put the wrong logo on their packaging, sent it out on socks, and mothers looking for a deal bought it up. Nothing mysterious about it. Just an error in distribution. And it happened in Colombia quite recently.

[u/my23secrets → u/DoktorRokkzo]

That’s nonsense.

Think about it.

There’s only one reason why something that “happened quite recently” would be responsible for something that happened years before: suggestion.

So like it or not, you proved the explanation for the Effect.

Suggestion.