"Fabien Mosen" wrote:
> Rune wrote:
>
> > In case a whole new competition is made, the
> > results of this competition are practically
> > useless. We can, however, use it to see which
> > logos have potential.
>
> It's certainly not useless.  There's plenty to
> learn from that experience.
> Let's get this voting process finished (maybe
> shorten the deadline, 1 month is very long for
> just 16 logos), and use the results as a basis
> to understand WHY the "awarded" logos are good.

I guess so.

> I'm pretty sure that almost every "designer"
> feels that there is a very wide room for
> improvement, and that even the "winner" will be
> dissatisfied (artistically speaking) if his
> (are there "her's" ? I don't think so) logo was
> used "as is".

I don't know about that, but never mind, let's not get into details here.

> > Better voting rules.
> > Better discussion about the voting rules. We
> > could for example include a voting option
> > that will enable us to see how many people
> > who support the logos. This discussion must
> > be done *before* the voting begins.
>
> Maybe giving points to each logo instead of
> ranking would help to discernate if a logo is
> "best liked" or "less disliked", or even if
> the whole set of logos is mature enough to
> deserve being officially used. Maybe there
> could be points by criterias (artistic,
> concept, tech, errr... sorry :). Of course,
> it would make the voting process a little more
> complicated.

I don't think giving points serves any purpose in this competition. I
personally think that the current rules were fine, if just people could
specify which logos they don't think is good enough at all.

> > More time.
> > I would think a deadline for the submission
> > of logos could be the end of year 2000. This
> > would give plenty (but not too much) of time
> > to discuss the logo requirements, the logos,
> > the voting rules, and all the other things.
>
> I think the "designers" had enough time this
> time (approx. 2 months, no ?).
> We should also care about not letting the
> things fade by disinterest, and the creative
> process must remain as spontaneous as possible
> (tough I know by experience how hard it is to
> get a good balance between spontaneity and
> maturity)

The 8 month until 2001 is not only for creating the logos. It is for
discussing/making the logo rules and definitions, discussing/making the
voting rules, making the logos, discussing and improving the logos. After
the deadline no rules nor any logos can be changed, so everything has to be
ready and set for the final voting, which will be definite.

If I know the community here right, all those discussions will take a lot of
time. It will take time for people to reply, it will take time for people to
make their points clear, and it will indeed take time for people to agree on
different subjects, if that possible at all.

And even then, I think it is better with too much time, than with too
little.

But anyway, it was not the intention that we went into details here. What I
really want to know is:

Is this competition good enough, or should we make a new one? How many are
for a new competition, and how many are against?

Greetings,

Rune

---
Updated March 15: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk
Containing 3D images, stereograms, tutorials,
The POV Desktop Theme, 350+ raytracing jokes,
miscellaneous other things, and a lot of fun!

Post a reply to this message