From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-11 16:48:17
Rene Rivera wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Rene Rivera <grafik.list_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>> I'll see what I can do :-)
>> Great. I have to say, I probably didn't consider it enough. I think
>> maybe 67 was most appealing because its execution was top-notch.
>> There are few other logos in the contest that were as polished. This
>> just goes to show that a good idea with sub-par execution will
>> probably make a negative impression on at least some people.
> True.. In my case it was a matter of time.. That one was one of the
> firsts one I did, when there was no contest. So I wasn't really trying
> to make it polished, just to get the concept out.
> This brings up the question of what we do about updated logos? Do we
> replace the existing entries? Do we have another contest? Do we add
> another entry? Not sure what is really fair to the other contributors.
I say we let the contest finish as planned, since its almost over (considering
when it was first announced). If the selected logo can't be adjusted so that
most of are happy with it, we can allow people to modify their submitted designs
and submit completely new ideas.
The logo contest rules didn't say that the selected logo waw guaranteed to be
used for any specific amount of time, so I don't think the winner can complain
if the logo is not used on the website, or if it is only used for a few days.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk