Since youre here Anthere,
Maybe I can axe you a couple questions... I actually like the idea of merging ideas and such with two winning logo desigs merging to make something better, but Im not sure that the way whats his name has been going about it is bordering on --well being rude and whatnot. Besides, just throwing a toony 7th place ant on a winning (and shaping up) 1st place logo, only makes the ant look like something we should stomp on.
But I also like the ant as a concept animal -- for a mascot probably even more than I like the Wikipede -- which was a clever play on the wikipedia name, but doesnt necessarily mean anything internationally. I mention on the Wikipedie bio that the only reason he looks cute at all is because he only has six appendages instead of a hundred. In that silly sense, the Wikipedia is less of a centipede than it is an ant anyway.
But what I really want to know --this sort of cheezy way of trying to curvumvent the voting process on the mascot--- Is this just a case of 'pushy French attitude' ;) or am I missing something?
Culturally illiterate, -S-
On the French Wikipedia we try to make all our decisions by consensus discussion (no rigid vote). It not an easy and quick way, but we think it the fairest solution. In the consensus process, we always trying to found alternative solution to avoid problems and make progress the decision process. In my point of view (perhaps shared by some French wikipedians), create new logo by mixing the finalist ones, was a way of trying to found alternative proposition that may please people. If you don't like them, just don't vote for it, what is the problem? If the organizer decide those logo are illegitimate, then make clear rules and remove those logo. In all case, please stop make contentious on a wikipedian just because (s)he is French.
Aoineko
PS : About the ant on the first logo, Oliezekat just propose it to Paullus (the original author) and Paullus decide by himself to put it on vote page. It is right, isn't it ?