On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 09:41:18AM +1030, Romana Challans scrawled: > On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 09:24 am, Daniel Stone shared thusly: > > While I disagree with CAISA's attitude of "we're taking it if you don't > > want it anyway", I think they have a point. The current logo isn't > > really easy recognizable, and doesn't look that good in colour, let > > alone not in colour. I think the new logo is simple, eye-catching and > > nice. It doesn't really convey to me the prospect of "recycling"; I only > > clued on to that when told. With that and a simple "computerbank" next > > to it, I think it would look very good, miles better than the current > > scrawl. > > Actually, > the CAISA attitude is better expressed as: > "we are exploring our options on logos as we have had a ridiculous number of > peopple grumble about the current one, and to not review that seems silly, > when we have such talent available" > > also, we are setting up pamphlets and posters and such, and choosing a logo > BEFORE getting those out makes sense. > > we have had many comments on this, both positive and negative, but the point > is: just because people say 'why bother' doesnt mean we wont. > > we 'inherited' the current logo on joining cai, and as we grow and expand, > feel its fair we all have a greater say in it. so, not only will caisa vote, > we'll certainly offer it to ALL of cai to choose. we think thats fair, after > all:) > > if the majority of caisa choose the old one, what harm is done? Yes, but the overall CAISA attitude still seems to be "we're taking it anyway", and nothing you've said disproves it; in fact, it only proves it. I think the logo is a huge symbolic ... symbol of national unity; god knows nothing else is unified. -- Daniel Stone <dstone@trinity.unimelb.edu.au> Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne
Attachment:
pgp00001.pgp
Description: PGP signature