On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 10:32 +0100, Thorsten Wilms wrote: > > > Would scale better and is less "busy" than the other submissions. > > That's a ridiculous claim, given submissions like > http://www.flickr.com/photos/j_baer/5142173763/in/pool-uawt-1#/photos/j_baer/5142173763/in/pool-1507...@n25/
Right, what i meant was not all, but rather the ones which i thought could be used as logos. And include this one as well with the brush: <http://www.flickr.com/photos/55752...@n05/5168384008/in/pool-1507...@n25/> The issue those icons have is they seem to symbolize an /edit/ action, like 'draw' or 'edit' . Checkout the launchpad's edit icon, it's very close to the brush. I dont see how those relates to a *team's* logo. It's like just using a '?' in a dot for a 'Support team' . > http://www.flickr.com/photos/55752...@n05/5196951321/in/pool-uawt-1#/photos/55752...@n05/5196951321/in/pool-1507...@n25/ I'm not even sure if anyone would relate the icon to artwork/freedom. But, i do like the thought process that lead to the logo. Hope it meant more about freedom than a mechanical fan, which I dont seem to relate to freedom. > > It's not like we couldn't replace the logo again, should there ever be a > better idea. > Replace it? when? ;) If we decide to change to a 'design' team, all the work folks have done will be in vain. It wont even be used for 2-3months. If everyone feels OK with changing a logo in just such a short period, we should make it clearer for people that their work might be replaced. And my concern was more about *closing* the submissions and finalizing, rather than about accepting submissions. -- Cheers, Vish -- ubuntu-art mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
