Hi devs, Votes are now closed for the new XWiki.org logo, and, according to http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Ah6DqXzfHT2vdHV5Ty1LX3lKU3U5V3M4YmN… , they seem pretty tight for: 12A, 12E, 15, 16B and proposals 4A and 19 were also mentioned by a significant number of voters (feel free to double-check the spreadsheet, at least for your own votes if not for the whole thread, to make sure I entered the right values). So, I propose to organize a second round of votes, from Thursday April 8th until Sunday April 11th. The voters will be asked to choose only ONE logo proposal (no more fuzzy votes this time) between 4A, 12A, 12E, 15, 16B and 19. Before the new round of votes starts, the authors of these 6 proposals are kindly asked to do the following by Wednesday, if not already done for round 1: * correct any inaccuracies that might have appeared in the name * try to integrate any constructive feedback that came with the votes (I tried to gather this feedback from the emails on http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/LogoChallengeRound2 ) * polish the design (if they consider it necessary) * provide the requested variations for .org, enterprise and office * provide samples for light and dark background * provide a black&white version * provide a 16X16 icon containing the logo or a representative part of the logo * provide a nice "Powered by XWiki" button that goes with the logo * provide a mockup/screenshot with the logo used in the current skin, colibri The _final_ versions should be uploaded here: http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/LogoChallengeRound2 . Unless updated, the versions that participated in round 1 will also be used for round 2, and voters will have to use their imagination in case any of the required use cases is missing. Please let me know if there are any objections regarding the finalists, the timeline or the requirements for round 2. Some commiters disagree with including in the final vote proposals 12A, 12E and 15, because of their similarity with the XWiki.com and Atlassian Confluence logos respectively. Since it seems that not everybody sees these resemblances, I tried to do the most impartial thing I could think of: I included these 3 proposals on the finalist page, with a visible warning that those who agree there is a similarity should definitely not vote for them in round 2, even if they like them very much (the goal being to have a new, original logo, not a variation of the old one or the logo of a competitor). My hope is that the community will properly decide whether these logos are suitable and meet the uniqueness requirement. Note that this is not the e-mail for _starting_ the second round, but rather for _agreeing on_ the second round. Thanks in advance for the cooperation. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/