The first runner-up may be simpler, but I find it as ugly as you find the winner. I assume others feel the same way, since it didn't win.
Adam Bishop
From: tarquin tarquin@planetunreal.com Reply-To: wikipedia-l@Wikipedia.org To: wikipedia-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] New logo and further process Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 10:02:46 +0100
Gutza wrote:
Richard Grevers wrote:
Yay - months of process and what do we get? The worst result - the logo that has the biggest technical problems in terms of reproduction in other media. Its greyscale version is incredibly unclear because it is far too busy. You just doubled or tripled the cost of Wikimedia letterhead, folks, so everyone who voted for it had better donate extra.
Plus it's horrible. No offence to anyone, the thing already won, so it's not a matter of offending the author anymore, but that logo stinks big time. If this is democracy in action, imagine running a country this way.
Gutza
(Before y'all start with me, yes, I had a few logos in the competition myself, and mine was obviously not chosen, but I would've been happy if we chose the first runner-up, which is not mine either. That would've been a logo, and a good one at that IMNSHO. The one we chose is neither good, and not even a real logo. It's a coloured puzzle ball for Chrissake!)
I am in complete agreement with you! It's horrible, it's too complex, and the first runner-up would be much better,
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
_________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus