Garth Wallace wrote:
> "David Gerard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>>
>>You could say the same about a certain ancient Hindu symbol of good luck,
>>but people will still think you mean Nazis when you use it.
>>
>
> Actually, the Nazi symbol has the tines reversed from the
> Buddhist symbol. But that's neither here nor there.
>
Do we plan to adopt the swastika (pointing in either direction) or the
cross (any shape in any color) or the crescent as Mozilla symbol?
The anseer is of course: no, we don't. Part of the reason is that every
one of them would offend someone: the believers in case of most crosses
and crescents, the Red Cross organization in the case of adopting their
copyrighted symbol, Swiss Army Knife makers in the case of the Swiss
cross, almost everybody in the case of swastika (either drection).
The valid question is why we are stuck with another controversial
symbol: the red star (used in the Linux icon and Windows about: page).
The polite and civilised way is not to use symbols which offend even a
minority, unless there are overwhelming historical reasons for doing so
in the given context. Do we really think that the red star is an
inherent part of Mozilla ethos?
Jacek
