Re: Debian GNU/Linux Logo chosen

[Benedikt Eric Heinen <beh@icemark.ch>]

> > I can't see a penguin on that logo. You sure it's not a sparrow or
> > something?
> > You sure, that someone who heard of Linux will ever find this CD to be
> > related with Debian if he saw the logo? I don't think so.
> What you say would be true no matter what logo we choose. A logo gets
> identified with a product by its association with that product. Until you
> do the associating, there can be no recognition.

Well, if the "normal" penguin is on there, people that already know the
penguin as the Linux mascot will at first identify this as a Linux related
thing. Then, at a later stage, he'll recognize it as Debian once he knows
the real Debian logo.

Just - the first point of "attraction" to the CD is missing. What is this
chosen Logo saying? Line-art? But - what else?


> > > We had a contest with votes. The contest went on for an awful long time,
> > > (someone said two years???). The most popular logo in the contest was not
> > > one that we could trademark, and it was very similar to logos used by
> > > similar products. We could not have used it for that reason.
> > Nice thing you state that now - after choosing a logo. 
> Why would Bruce be responsible for keeping you up-to-date with the state
> of affairs. The web pages have been there forever! You have been free to
> follow this as closely as you might wish.


> I feel compelled to ask, "Why have you had nothing to say on the matter
> before Bruce made his annoncement? 

Let's say - primarily you feel compelled to defend Bruce.

As for why I haven't said anything - simple, I *VOTED*. You know, just go
on the page, and rate logo by logo. Put a vote in and later accept it if
the majority doesn't like your most wanted but voted for something else.

Also - if we ever bothered to put up a vote, I want some real REASONS why

 a) Bruce didn't say which logos of the vote were unacceptable a good deal 
    earlier (something he didn't do at all up to now - he just said, that 
    the most wanted one is unacceptable).
    Hint: If you again want to come up with the "fact" the Bruce is so 
          loaded with work from he Project Leadership, then before you 
          answer also think of reasons (and give them!) WHY his position
          hasn't been "taken apart" and split up on various people...

    [Compare: Your country also isn't run by his Majesty Bill Clinton
              alone! No - there's lots of advisors, senators and other
              staff around to help him wherever possible]


> > forgot - if you would have stated before, that the most-wanted logo is
> > unacceptable for copyright reasons (btw. WHY?), then you couldn't have
> > chosen whatever you liked.
> Why, when folks don't get what they wanted, is there always some
> "ulterior" motive ascribed in the matter?

Well, this is the first time (I can remember) that Bruce actually IGNORED
A VOTE! Why the heck did we ever put up a vote in the first place. We
could have had any crappy logo we ever wanted over a year back, without
having to wait for people to vote on something...


> > Besides, don't you think it's rather strange, that if the first one is
> > unacceptable, to take the 25th(!!!) by popularity (according to:
> > http://fatman.mathematik.tu-muenchen.de/~schwarz/debian-logo/overview.html) 
> > instead?
> What I find rather strange, is that he was able to come up with an
> acceptable alternative from the entire lot. My look at those submissions
> left me with the feeling that there wasn't a logo in the lot.

Well, this is rather subjective, isn't it. I see quite a few that I
like, and I honor Bruce's comment, that the top placed logo is 
unacceptable from the copyright viewpoint (even though this also was my
preferred logo) - but I argue, that the ranks before the chosen logo also
contained other usable logos, and that Bruce now violated the whole sense
of the vote.


> > Democratic procedures usually include taking the top two and getting
> > people to vote between them, if neither of the two can make a clear
> > winner.
> > 
> In this case the issue isn't one of a democratic nature. Democracy
> provided a bunch of unexceptable alternatives.
I guess you mean "unacceptable" alternatives, right? Otherwise I missed
what you might want to say. But - OK, assuming "unacceptable
alternatives", here's what I suggest:

The following logos were ranked higher than the chosen one (#28!):

<pic>	<score>	

eb07	[673]:
fn02	[631]:
jhe06	[622]:
jhe04	[597]:
dr04	[543]:
jhe07	[539]:
jhe05	[530]:

fn01	[477]:
ew06	[432]:
ew05	[426]:
fa01	[420]:
ew04	[402]:
ge01	[384]:
ts04	[375]:
jhe02	[373]:
sw06	[355]:
lh03	[349]:
ew02	[348]:
cs12	[346]:
je01	[344]:
eb04	[343]:
kl04	[343]:
ez01	[341]:  {Note: Variation of the chosen picture by another artist}
cs18	[341]:
tw01	[337]:
sw14	[333]:
kl02	[328]:

Note - only the first 7(!) got more positive than negative feedback, the
next 18 got more than one third of positive feedback (so less than two
thirds negative feedback).

Now - for EACH of the above listed pictures, I want exact reasons, on why
these are unacceptable, and I am talking non-subjective reasons, i.e. only
reasons on basis of potential trademarking problems or other OBJECTIVE
problems accepting the logo.

If there is a valid reason making the picture unacceptable exists for
*EVERY SINGLE ONE* of the above 27 pictures -- and NONE of these reasons
would also invalidate number 28 (the chosen logo), then and just then I
will accept the logo as chosen without further ado.


> This required someone to decide. Bruce, for me, is the obvious person to
> make such a decision. 
> We elected him to deal with the day to day operations of the Debian
> organization.

You show me a dictionary where it says under project leader "allowed to
dismiss 'official' votes at his discretion".

This has not been a simple decision as with "no 'purity' package in
Debian", but this one HAD A VOTE TAKEN and that vote was DELIBERATELY
ignored!


> According to my criterion for a logo, Bruce was able to come up with an
> acceptable candidiate. If fits the following criterion:
> 
> 	1. It should be simple and clean of line. Busy textures or
> 	   color schemes are bad for a logo.

Among pics #1-27 IMHO all except #7, 17, 23, and 27 do not fulfil this
one.

> 	2. It should render in black and white as well as in color.

Among those left after 1., cross out #21.


> 	3. You should be able to recognize it even after it has been 
> 	   xeroxed 100 times.

+ cross out #9.

> 	4. It should not be rcognizable as, or confused with, another logo
> 	   already in use in your marketplace.

If we would agree on the "official" penguin being a bad thing (which I
personally wouldn't), then cross out #1, 5, 10, and 12.

This leaves the following logos in the race:

#2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, and 26.

That leaves 17 out of 27 in the race.


> > Oh - let me guess, you would've spent money on that artist without
> > discussing that publicly?

> Pay attention. The choice Bruce made was to not spend money and to go with
> an acceptable alternative. I think that this was a good decision, but more
> important, I think it was a decision that Bruce _should_ have made.

OK, so you also agree on, no matter what the project leader vote comes up
with, it'll finally be Bruce choice on who makes the race, because that's
part of the day to day operations, right?

Besides, taking #28 and NOT #23 (both have the same basic idea, but that
other one had a wider "concensus" than the chosen one) is clearly breaking
what people were voting for. 

I wouldn't have minded to say "OK, we close the vote today as-is and take
the highest ranking legally acceptable logo". But that hasn't been the
case.


I *VOTED* for a logo, and I'd like to see my vote HONORED, not IGNORED!


> We needed a logo for the last release and couldn't come to terms with it.
> We need one just as bad now, maybe even worse, and I see no reason why
> continued thrashing by the group would have gotten us a logo in the next
> year or so, much less the next month.

So, what would have kept Bruce from doing the above, just closing the vote
and take the highest ranking acceptable logo from there. And - no, he
can't tell me that he did exactly that, because his choice is closer to
violating his xeroxing-rule you mentioned, than the second logo based on
the same idea, that is 5 ranks higher.


> But to speak to your previous question, "Yes, Bruce could very well have
> spent the money without our permission. That is what we empowered him to
> do by electing him. 

OK, Dale! Come on - give me an exact comprehensive list of things that
Bruce is allowed to do in his role as a project leader. You certainly know
all that, you voted for him.


> > Or - name the acceptable logos (note: PLURAL), and talk to Christian
> > Schwarz to only list those logos and set their counters to 0. Then
> > send an official announcement for the vote on the Debian logo in
> > comp.os.linux.announce - to let the public decide.
> This didn't work before. Why should it be expected to work now?

Up to now, I haven't seen an ending date on the vote. What would be so
difficult about setting an ending date on a vote. I mean, the project
leader vote started today, that carried an end date for the vote - didn't
it?  What an amazing concept, these ending dates...


> I say THANK YOU BRUCE, for breaking this log jam and providing some more,
> much needed marketing fluff, without dragging the rest of us through the
> process.

Breaking is the right word, but not breaking this jam, but more like in
breaking the rules.



  Benedikt


Windows 95: n.
    32-bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit
    operating system originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor,  written
         by a 2-bit company that can't stand for 1 bit of competition.



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-private-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .