I agree that we should use the first round of voting to learn what the
general consensus of the Haskell community is on a logo design idea
(and to filter out the non-viable logos).
In the spirit of bikeshedding, I would love to see---and would
volunteer to spend part of a day editing, say, the
On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 16:19:43 -0700, Ashley Yakeley
ash...@semantic.org wrote:
[...]
I'm currently liking
30 (specifically, 30.7)
58
61 (specifically, the second image)
62
It would be nice to be able to specify a specific member image of a
group of images; for example, the second image in group
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 6:13 AM, Benjamin L. Russell
dekudekup...@yahoo.comwrote:
On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 16:19:43 -0700, Ashley Yakeley
ash...@semantic.org wrote:
[...]
I'm currently liking
30 (specifically, 30.7)
58
61 (specifically, the second image)
62
It would be nice to be able to
Another reason condorcet voting is nice is that there is no need to group
similar items together. Condorcet voting eliminates the spoiler
candidate effect, so having N almost identical entries won't adversely
affect that group (by spreading out the votes for that group among more
sub-entries
On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 11:13:40AM +, Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
Another reason condorcet voting is nice is that there is no need to group
similar items together.
I think the plan is that once a logo class is chosen, we'll have
another vote for the actual colour scheme etc to be used, if
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 11:50:51 +, Ian Lynagh ig...@earth.li wrote:
On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 11:13:40AM +, Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
Another reason condorcet voting is nice is that there is no need to group
similar items together.
I think the plan is that once a logo class is chosen, we'll
