[WikiEN-l] "New" logo JIMBO, PLEASE INTERVENE

Wed Oct 15 15:10:20 UTC 2003

Dante-
> With all due respect mav, this is bs. No one voted for the logo that is
> currently on the 'pedia. I'd like to ask Jimbo to step in at this point and
> make some sort of  decree from on high... this logo thing is getting out of
> hand.

At the point the logo was updated, there was virtually unanimous consensus  
that the Nohat variant was an improvement (20 in favor, 2 against). This  
satisfied the condition of the last stage of our contest, namely,  
optimization by consensus. As in all such consensus discussions, only  
interested parties participate. If you had looked around on Meta, you  
would have noticed that these discussions have been going on since Oct 1.  
What do you think where the variant submissions came from? The variant  
process was broadly advertised at least on the English Wikipedia.

True, a person was more likely to participate if they disliked the winning  
logo. But that is the whole point -- those who were not happy with the new  
logo tried to find ways to improve it. Now it would be nice for those who  
do not like these improvements to comment.

Most involved persons agree that the Nohat logo has a much cleaner, more  
refined and logo-like look. It is a logo that you can actually print on a  
letterhead without making an idiot of yourself when people ask you what  
"kallo" means (no offense to the artist, who agrees that the logo needed  
optimization and likes the Nohat variant). It has been our agreement that  
we would try to find ways to refine the winning logo concept after the  
contest was closed. This had been decided when it became clear that almost  
half of the voters on the English Wikipedia strongly disliked the winning  
logo (enough to vote not to ratify it at all). So what we are trying to do  
now is, instead of entering more and more stages of voting, find something  
approaching consensus on the logo.

You get complaints from the consensus folks when you use voting and you  
get complaints from the voting folks when you use consensus. What I want  
to know is whether you have any substantial remarks regarding the logo  
itself -- how to improve it to satisfy your personal aesthetical concerns.

Regards,

Erik