[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Logo swap vote is bogus

On Tue, Jun 29, 1999 at 09:38:48AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> > Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> writes:
> > 
> > > My complaint comes from the fact that there was absolutely no
> > > discussion about this new vote prior to it being proposed.
> > 
> > If that were true, I might sympathize. Since it's not true, I have to
> > wonder just what you're trying to pull here.  (To be kind, I'll assume
> > that this is just hyperbole.)
> OK, show me any discussion in the archives (URL's please) ---- I've looked, 
> and didn't find any.
> The only replies to the proposal mail were ``seconded'' type responses, with 
> no attempt to show a justification for the view.


> > Pretty hard to get any seconds without a discussion.... :-)
> saying ``seconded'' doesn't count as discussing an issue IMO.

I can't speak for the other seconds, but I did have a discussion with
Branden before I seconded it.  And more specifically, I recall
discussing this during the original logo vote, in message

> > * raul (swirl)
> > Concept: magic being release from a genie bottle.
> > Pros: simple, good associations, already in a good format (EPS)
> > Cons: none :)
> This is my favorite of the bunch, except for one thing - even more than
> with jeanette, I think the two logos should be switched.  I think that
> the logo with an added feature should be the official one.

(Note that that message is on the non-web-archived portion of -vote)


/--------------------------------\  /--------------------------------\
|       Daniel Jacobowitz        |__|        SCS Class of 2002       |
|   Debian GNU/Linux Developer    __    Carnegie Mellon University   |
|         dan@debian.org         |  |       dmj+@andrew.cmu.edu      |
\--------------------------------/  \--------------------------------/

Reply to: