Fedora Logo: Modifications to the "f" and color
jeremy.hogan at gmail.com
Wed Nov 9 21:51:50 UTC 2005
On 11/9/05, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta at gmail.com> wrote:
> 1) very free-form brain-storming discussion with lots of crazy crap
> from this debate comes a sense of bounds as to constraints on the
> solution space.
I thought we did that. We had puppies and goats and periodic tables and all
sorts of stuff flying around. The bounds were things like "we're sticking to
blue" and "no hats".
2) applying the constraints, task a team or individual to spin up 2
> or 3 solutions which individually meet the constraints but provide
> interpretations as to mix of important themes.
We did that too, before and after Matt's design. After his design there were
some suggestions made (make the f look more like an f, pronounce the
infinity symbol more). Of the community submitted variations on Matt's
design, the only ones near professional enough to even consider were the
ones from earlier this week that looks like rain dropping into a pond. If
you mean that Matt or Red Hat should have produced more than one version, I
think that would have only encouraged apples to oranges discussions. You
simply can't look at a nike style swoop v. Adidas three stripes, and start a
discussion about which is "better" and make any sense of it. RH took the
requirements, distilled the high points of teh discussion and likely went
over tons of iterations internally. Someone had to make final cut or or we'd
all still be explaining to new list members that a blue hat with a puppy in
it wasn't gonna fly.
3) focused feedback discussion on those specific 2 or 3 choices.
I don't know that this was run any differently than say deciding which
packages to include in Core. The people who cared were consulted. Those who
cared the most, gave the most feedback. But at the end of the day, this is a
legal issue as well as a branding issue, and RH is the sugar daddy, so it's
their call. They have to hire the lawyers to protect it, they have to live
with it as an extension of their brand. When you compare RH sales to their
market cap, you realize their brand is worth a couple of billion dollars. So
I think they could have handled the task very well with out without the
immense and multi-month consultation they facilitated about it. And if this
was about the software, and not about tradmarks and legal issues and
marketing and branding I would have welcomed a massive referendum. But it is
about all those things as well as making everyone feel as included as we
> If we fell down in this discussion, its in the fact that we only had
> one draft for consideration which met the constraints at step 2.
I dunno, I saw 5-6 designs come out after Matt's. He doesn't have to produce
multiple logos for us to have seen multiple logos. Now, we stopped posting
all of them at some point I noticed, but we had an awful lot of input and
opportunity in the last several months to register our feelings.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the marketing