14 Apr
2010
14 Apr
'10
10:05 a.m.
On Apr 13, 2010, at 3:39 PM, Marius Dumitru Florea wrote:
Hi all,
Guillaume Lerouge wrote:
No but if you check none of us voted for it and there was no rule for giving -1 (I would
have given it otherwise since I didn't like it in the first round. That said I was
pretty sure nobody would vote for it when I saw it. I was wrong it seems ;)).
BTW the problem of readability was raised even in the first round but not much was done
about it (or I didn't see it).
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 00:41, Ludovic Dubost <ludovic(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
+1 for 4A
and I'm at this point very -1 on 16 because of the W which has a missing
arm..
I can't read XWiki in it..
I'd like to react about this: at this stage I share Ludovic's feeling. I had
people from outside the project look at the 16 logo and they weren't able to
read "XWiki" in it. I'm afraid that while stylistically interesting, this
logo is too unreadable for mainstream use - unless we don't expect anyone to
understand the XWiki logo that is.
I'm feeling pretty close to giving it a -1 too if its readability isn't
improved. I know I might be going against the flow here but we're about to
make a significant choice here and I don't want us to regret it.
Any thoughts?
IMO it's a bit too late to give -1 for a logo that passed the first
round. Is it less readable now? 16 was voted by 11 community members (including
myself) in the first
round. Do we count less than "people from outside the project"? If we
want a community-chosen logo then we should let the community choose. If
we want a logo that is good for marketing then we should find a branding
company to do it for us.
errr? We *definitely* want a logo that is good for marketing! That's the main point
(the only point?) of having a logo.
When users log into some website and see this logo we want them to know the site is using
XWiki (if they can't read it, they won't even be able to google it if they like it
and want to find more about this project).
It seems you're opposing marketing and community. I don't know why. This is all
about marketing. The whole xwiki.org is about marketing (i.e. make people want to use
XWiki). Otherwise we'd just publish the sources with no documentation at all.
Thanks
-Vincent
PS: I'm not saying that we should revote or remove that logo. I'm just giving a
strong opinion that the logo is unreadable and is going to cause a lot of confusion. I
would like to see that fixed if that logo is selected by the vote.
Thanks,
Marius
>
> Guillaume
>
>
>> Ludovic
>>
>> Le 12/04/10 16:44, Sergiu Dumitriu a écrit :
>>
>> On 04/12/2010 04:30 PM, Thibaut Camberlin wrote:
>>>
>>>> My corrected vote is +1 for 12A.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> 12A has been retired and is no longer a valid option. Please choose
>>> another one.