Jimmy- The Wikimedia Commons homepage is hardly "obscure", and that is where the vote was prominently linked, in bold text. Unlike Wikipedia, all the Wikimedia Commons languages are stored in the same wiki. Anyone working on the Commons on a regular basis will have noticed the vote. That is for whom it was intended. Before you made your ex cathedra announcement that the vote was to be considered "inconclusive", "unofficial" and "informal", 99 votes had already been cast - hardly a small sample, particularly considering that 50 of these votes were cast for a single logo, which will clearly be the winner even if we keep this up for 3 months. There currently exists, to my knowledge, no written policy on logo copyrights or the procedure for choosing new logos. As always, we try to improve our procedures along every step of the way. I have no problem whatsoever with requiring the transfer of copyright to the Wikimedia Foundation for the winning logo before we put it into use. I do have a problem with the way this issue was handled, with no prior communication, no clear path of resolution, and an ex cathedra announcement. I am readily available for communication, so there is really no good reason for that. Again, now that we agree that a copyright transfer is necessary, the deadline has been extended and the vote has been more broadly announced, I ask you to remove or rephrase your announcement on Commons:Logo as a gesture of good faith. Regards, Erik