[Wikipedia-l] New logo and further process

[Gutza]

Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:

>On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 11:36:01AM +0300, Gutza wrote:
>  
>
>>Richard Grevers wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Yay - months of process and what do we get? The worst result - the 
>>>logo that has the biggest technical problems in terms of reproduction 
>>>in other media. Its greyscale version is incredibly unclear because it 
>>>is far too busy.
>>>You just doubled or tripled the cost of Wikimedia letterhead, folks, 
>>>so everyone who voted for it had better donate extra.
>>>      
>>>
>>Plus it's horrible. No offence to anyone, the thing already won, so it's 
>>not a matter of offending the author anymore, but that logo stinks big 
>>time. If this is democracy in action, imagine running a country this way.
>>    
>>
>
>OK, we've seen voting in action twice - first with article count reform,
>now with a logo. And both times with a horrible results. If anyone wasn't
>convinced that voting is bad, he can definitely see it now. So can we stop
>making decisions this way now ?
>  
>
Suggestions? If such a significant minority is so dissatisfied with the 
results of voting, do you think Jimbo or some board picking a logo would 
yield higher levels of satisfaction among wikipedians? In this 
particular instance, I personally would've been happier with Jimbo 
picking one because I know which one he prefers, but I'm 100% certain 
that would've upset quite a lot of "betrayed wikipedians" "appalled by 
the acts of dictatorship" etc. And they'd be right, as far as the 
WikiWiki community goes.

So, what would you suggest?

Gutza