[Wikipedia-l] Re: New logo and further process

[Erik Moeller]

David-
> I agree. Indeed, the current winner should have been disqualified when
> people first raised their objections to it.

And when people raise objections to the runner-up, and to the runner-up to  
that logo and so forth? It is completely delusional to believe that it  
will be possible to reach consensus on something as subjective as a logo.  
No matter what modifications are made, there will always be people who do  
not like a concept. Some will always find it too simple, too complex, too  
colorful, too bland, too busy, too cliche, too bright, too dark ..

The "clutter" concern is a reasonable one and I share it. We are now  
working on improving the logo to address this concern. It would be helpful  
if you would join these discussions.

> There doesn't seem to have
> been made any effort to ensure that the submussions met the
> requirements, as if they were merely suggestions.

They were, for the most part. Voters were encouraged to take format and  
size requirements into account, but if a logo is an absolutely brilliant  
concept, it would be unfair to discard it because it contains some Latin  
text, has the wrong output format, is too large etc. -- these things can  
be worked on.

> I also think that the
> fact that currently there are 73 votes on the English Wikipedia
> ratification, and 41% are against is a strong sign that there are a lot
> of others who agree with me and tarquin.

Many people agree that the puzzle sphere in its current form is not  
optimal. I do, too. So let's work on making it better.

> I think that in an organization
> that prides itself on consensus, some effort should be made to address
> the dissenters' concerns.

That's exactly what's happening on Meta right now.

> I have gone to the effort of collecting some famous and successful logos
> from around the web and put them at http://www.nohat.net/logos.html.

This would have been useful when we started the contest.

Regards,

Erik