I agree. I offer sincere apologies if I have offended anyone. B
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 8:03 AM, Joan Touzet <[email protected]> wrote: > All, > > I would remind you to try and proceed in this discussion with a > modicum of decorum and assuming good faith on the part of those > engaged. Sarcasm, anger, and facetious responses are not helping. > > Once again, for the record, I don't have a problem with the > logo personally, but I have a responsibility to raise this issue > as a representative of the PMC and because of the requests of > those who approached me. I have no other mission here. I knew > when I started the thread it'd turn into a bikeshed; sadly, > there was no way to avoid that, as burying the requests would > be tantamount to me making an *individual* decision that trumps > that of the collective -- hardly becoming behaviour for a PMC > member. > > Let me try and summarize the discussion to date. I didn't count > up responses to the thread, but it seems clear that nearly all > respondents so far have no issue personally with the logo. > > A minority of individuals suggested that it may be time to change > the logo, the tagline and even the project name for various reasons. > If we're considering any of these steps, now would be the time to > figure that out -- prior to the impending 2.0 beta and release. > > I'd like to steer discussion towards these points and away from > the topic of logo acceptability -- it's become clear to me that > there is no further useful discussion possible on that topic. > > Best regards, > Joan > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bryan Green" <[email protected]> > To: "Giovanni Parra" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 10:18:10 AM > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Improved CouchDB logo > > I am sure someone would find it offensive (maybe artists)? The point is > that we can't decide what is offensive to someone else. We should do our > best, within reason, to not offend. Also, the you have to keep in mind > that a brand logo is not just art. It has a particular use to get a > branding message across. If we feel that the current brand for couchdb is > best represented by the current logo, then we shouldn't change anything and > be ok with the people who are put off from couchdb due to the logo (no > matter how "silly" we think that is). If we have doubts then we should > discuss it. > > Personally, I am not sure the Relax mantra is a good one anymore either. > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:10 AM, Giovanni P <[email protected]> wrote: > > > After re-reading the first message of the thread I'm convinced that, > > despite the present logo not being offensive in any way, it can sometimes > > give a wrong impression. > > > > My humble suggestion is that we gather suggestions and, if we find none, > > maintain the logo. Otherwise change it. > > > > So here is my (serious) idea for a logo that fits with the "relax" motto: > > > http://www.papeldeparede.etc.br/wallpapers/snoopy-e-woodstock_6591_1024x768.jpg > > > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Giovanni P <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Et_selskab_af_danske_kunstnere_i_Rom.jpg > >> is this offensive? > >> > >> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Bryan Green <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> I would assume we would discuss it as we are now. > >>> > >>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Giovanni P <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> If I declare myself offended (for no reason, because there is > >>>> absolutely no > >>>> reason to be offended by the present logo) by the next logo you come > up > >>>> with, will you change it? > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Alexander Shorin <[email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Bryan Green < > [email protected]> > >>>> > wrote: > >>>> > > It may not offend you, but apparently it offends some people. > This > >>>> is a > >>>> > > bad thing for a logo. I think this is why it is rare for the > human > >>>> > figure > >>>> > > to be common in most logos. Most keep logos very simple. > >>>> > > >>>> > There are 7 billion people on Earth - you'll never fit them all. > >>>> > Let's move away from abstract angry offended people to concrete ones > >>>> > with their own arguments why they thought that logo hits them and > >>>> > discuss their problem personally. Anyone around? Joan? > >>>> > Otherwise this is counterproductive discussion about edge cases > which > >>>> > will never happens. > >>>> > > >>>> > -- > >>>> > ,,,^..^,,, > >>>> > > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > >
