The whole point of this process was to choose a
logo to represent Wikipedia in all languages.
There was a VERY lengthy debate about how to
have a fair voting system.
I completely agree and was a bit broadsided by the very notion when I got back
from my field study. If there is a ratification process, it should be up or
down on the concept and if a super-majority of Wikipedia versions do not
ratify by a set date, then the concept isn't ratified (just like an amendment
to the US Constitution when it is sent to the states for ratification). But
individual Wikipedia versions should not have the option to opt out (just as
individual states do not have the option to opt out of an Amendment).
Wikipedia is one project with many different language versions. Therefore only
one logo is needed.
The concept won on a plurality, so let's work on the winning concept to
improve it so that a majority of Wikipedians can be satisfied with it.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)