On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 2:47 AM, Florian Fesseler <ffesse...@kapit.fr> wrote: > 2012/1/24 David Arno <da...@davidarno.org> > >> >> It's great that the PPMC members are seeking the opinions of the community, >> but care needs to be taken over how that is done. Cynical people might read >> what you wrote as "the PPMC likes #42. The community voted for #49. Bearing >> in mind the negatives of #49, could the community re-vote please. Unless >> you >> overwhelmingly choose #49 though, the PPMC will choose #42 regardless of >> the >> result." If I were the designer of #49, I'd be pretty pee'd off over the >> biased tone of the announcement. >> >> Being a bloody-minded person at heart, even though I prefer #42, I'm >> tempted >> to vote for #49 just to counter the bias... >> >> David. >> >> > Yep, that's what I basically meant here : > http://markmail.org/message/riiokhgedxsnednh#query:+page:1+mid:bcn3qvvjtg6sfmdp+state:results
Hi David, I think Florian was speaking to Doug McCune in regards to influencing others by describing his interpretation of the logo. Now other people may see the logo in the same light as he did, and may never have come to that conclusion on their own, and are now swayed toward the alternate option. I specifically didn't want to influence anyone by saying what others saw in a particular logo, good or bad. I wanted everyone to come to their own conclusion. But at the same time, I wanted to be transparent about what PPMC members were discussing about the logos and how they felt towards one vs the other, and without insulting the author. It's a delicate balance, so I apologize if anyone is offended. - Doug
