Keith M Wesolowski wrote: >On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 12:02:46PM -0700, Darren.Reed at sun.com wrote: > > > ... > >>There have been lots of ideas and rationales about what is >>good or bad, and when someone said "shark" (specifically >> > >And this same damned discussion has been going for almost 3 years now. >I'm wholly supportive of the Advocacy Group's efforts to promote >OpenSolaris and if they believe a mascot is an important aspect of >that then I wish them the best of success with it. But for the sake >of those of us who don't care to see hundreds of messages about the >pros and cons of this or that mascot or the dire need for more >artwork, please keep this topic off ogb-discuss >
Where's the baseball bat....not the least of which is to beat myself for responding to an email from you... The original email was NOT a call for discussion about what the mascot should OR should not be... It was a call to action that something needs to be thought about and put in motion. It was a draft schedule for someone to consider and hopefully put some people in motion towards deciding "we need to get there, and to do that we need to go along path X." Nowhere did my original email say "now lets start discussing what our mascot should be." Go and reread it. Now if the response of the OGB is to say "advocacy, go and look at this and come back with a plan", great, but so far the OGB has *NOT* responded and more pointedly, Steve Lau has since said that his email was *his personal opinion*, not that of the OGB. The reason I addressed this to the OGB is because it is a larger issue than just "advocacy", it is also identity and creating a mark. And at some point people such as yourself should step back and try to see the forest, not just the trees. Darren
