It's all been very democratic, yes, the community has posted its ideas and voted on them. But what if none of the ideas were ultimately any good? I'm worried about the trend to rather boringly just rework the Wikimedia logo.

I think the "submit ideas" phase should have lasted a lot longer, at least until a few logos came along which had massive support, rather than the sporadic support the others have had, with only mild majorities. Indeed, I think the foundation should be more active in this.

What we've now ended up with is refining and voting on ultimately substandard logos. That's my opinion anyway, but can any of you really see the voted logos dominating the three projects?

The Wikisource/Wikinews (and indeed 'pedia most of all) contests came out with some fantastic results. We should have waited for equal gems.