tarquin wrote:
I suggest the following:
* we set out some basic design goals: image size, max filesize,
possibility to go greyscale for t-shirts & letterheads.
That should have been the first discussion before we had any specific
submissions.
* we invite all 10 finalists to rework their logos,
with help from the
community, to fit these guidelines
Each finalist should be somehow reduced to one design. Two variants for
one of our candidates differed only between the use of bright blue or
strumpf blue, a meaningless difference. In other cases these may
require separate decision making processes.
* after this process, we run the vote again, this time
informing
voters of how the logos meet these requirements
There should be no hurry. There can be as many rounds as it takes.
Winning would require an absolute majority of votes cast. After each
round the logo with the fewest votes would be dropped. More could be
dropped if they have fewer than 10% of the votes received by the highest
vote getter. This latter provision could even be workable over the
entire range of 137. Transferable ballots would improve the efficiency
especially in the early stages, but only with a very limited number of
transfers. Going beyond third choice is likely to create confusion.
The first round when there is a very large number of candidates will
result in significant reduction in the number of candidates.
Ec