[Wikipedia-l] Logo, third voting phase

[Anthere]

Hein ? ...speechless...no...I do not think I said that
Or if I did, it was not understood the way I meant it
I fear.
 
I am all for a common logo. I could go for variations.
But all my contributions to the topic have been in the
direction of us having a common one, under which we
could all be recognised as ONE project. I think what I
suggested once in a discussion was that old logos
could be kept, but I meant a global vote would decide
this. A wikipedia wide vote, where people would
globally agree to use the new one, or to keep the
current set as is. This was precisely the last option
of the second part of the vote. Option 12.

My opinion is that it is curious to have asked people
to vote for the 12 option globally, to again ask them
locally. The option 12 specified that only "the set"
was an option, and now we suggest that actually the
individual option is ok.
 
I am very unhappy to be here associated with that
third part, which I do not support. I supported the 12
option, not this.
Should one wikipedia choose that individualistic path,
I would consider that a failure for the current
process. If some of my comments are responsible for
this last part, I deeply regret them.

I have been unhappy for 2 years with our illigitimate
logo. I supported this competition very much, I spent
a lot of time trying to make logos myself and to get
french people involved, I do not want to be associated
to this third part, which is just going against all my
wishes.
 
I want us to take decisions together, to work deeply
on that. Not to pretend working together, to be
allowed at the last step to be sessionnists.
 
The current french logo has a very deep history to
carry. I want to say again that I respect and
appreciate very much his original author, a very nice
fellow. And to say again that I know he was doing what
he thought the *best* at that time. He was acting in
good faith.
When the logo was changed, we were very few, still in
phase I, with extremely little communication between
wikipedias, and a software decision process entirely
centred on en, which was strongly resented by several
internationals.
 
"Our" logo was not a community work
"Our" logo choice was not a community decision. One
person draw it one day, then sent it to Jason, asking
him to install it. Jason, quite naturally, said "let's
ask the community first". The original author got in a
frenzy, indicating the english people had no
legitimity over french choices. So the logo was
installed, with no french giving his opinion; just
discovering it one day on Wikipedia. The decision to
change the logo was made by one person, with no
discussion whatsoever. For this, it is illegitimate as
a community choice imho.
 
Besides, this affair raised tensions between Jimbo and
the french wikipedia, and it also raised tensions
between the french wikipedians as well. Some very
harsch words were exchanged. Some talk of forking
then.
I was a one or two months old newbie, so I only
protested, but let the logo in place. Just tried to
explain to Jimbo what happened. Thanks for Brion for
soothing people at that occasion. I hope people
realise how important Brion is in the existence of the
international wikipedias. Not only for software
details, but just for his very helpful way to help
people understand one another.

Were that logo change happen today, I would boldly
revert a change that would be "today" said anti wiki.
Actually, I think that anyone boldly changing the logo
with an entirely new one that way today would be
labelled a problematic user at best, a vandal at
worse.
 
Consequently, not only do the logo has no right to be
there, since no opportunity was given to "discuss" it
and to "choose" together, but it also carry the weight
of separatism.

This is bad for a common project to exist under
different logos. A logo is precisely a message of
unity. As I already said, variations are ok to me, as
long as it is obvious to externals that they belong to
a common network. But our logo was quite different
from the original one, and would be even more
different of the new one. I just fail to see it as
acceptable.

Somewhere, in the french definition of consensus,
there is a notion of "blocking position". If we were
deciding upon consensus, I would use this right. Since
we are currently using democracy, I can't.
However, if the french choice is to keep the current
logo, officially showing to the world, a clear desire
of independance, I think this will require to be
seriously worked on.
If it is just an aesthetic choice (clearly, not
everyone is happy with the new one), I wonder if I
won't set a voting session every few months, to check
if the group did not change his mind :-)))

And in any case, asking people to vote three times is
bad.

-----

Since some people are not very happy with the new one
they consider cluttered, why would not we adopt that
logo for now.

And then a couple of artists quietly work on a few
less variants, and make new propositions in a couple
of months ?


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com