[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lojban] Re: lojban logo
Xah Lee,
This is an extremely silly thread to wake up to!
The Lojban logo may not be an outstanding example of marketing-oriented graphic design, but who really cares?
This is not important. The Logical Language Group is not really a high-powered sales organization.
I really do not believe that having a better logo would significantly improve the extent to which LLG achieves its goals.
Improving the educational material available regarding Lojban is an important task for LLG. Improving the logo really is not.
If you have a much nicer Lojban logo to suggest, I'm sure the LLG management would be happy to consider it. Otherwise, I believe they are absolutely correct to prioritize other matters.
You mention a bunch of big companies in your message. As well as professional logos, one thing distinguishing these companies is that they have management who know how to focus on what's important for their business. For LLG, it is NOT the logo, at the present time.
I strongly suggest this thread be killed.
-- Ben G
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
> [mailto:lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org]On Behalf Of xah lee
> Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2005 5:14 AM
> To: lojban-list@lojban.org
> Subject: [lojban] Re: lojban logo
>
>
> the quality of a logo is easily ascertained by asking for assessment
> any professional in the logo business. To have to state this like a
> defendant is really insulting.
>
> the current situation, where a garbage logo is used while nobody sees
> wrong with it, in fact perhaps feel great about it, is a common
> phenomenon of the OpenSource situation, fill with ignorance and lies.
>
> Following is a message about logos i wrote a couple years ago. It
> should give a indication of what is a good logo.
> (again: I have no expertise in logos. However, the following is basic
> about logos any person who have thought about it should know. It is
> insulting, that these days one have to state and argue for the most
> obvious things among the OpenSourcer ignoramuses and lies.
>
> for those who may be offended here because what seems to be contrary
> opinion, i don't require you to be any expert or connoisseur in logos
> or design, but merely for you to think just 1 hour of your life about
> logo. Yes, just think about logos. Think about it in a serious way, as
> if your life depends on it. Go online and look at logos. Go to library
> and read about logo designs books & collections. Go outdoors and
> observe logos. Think about it just for 1 hour of your whole life's
> time. (as opposed to, say, graphics professionals who spend years
> thinking about it, or even a college student who did happen to have
> taken a course related to logo design or advertisement or philosophies
> of imageries) Then, if you find what i said about the lojban logo
> unreasonable or outrageous, then i'll accept it.
> )
>
> some quick tips for good logos:
>
> * good logo is not something generic, even if it is beautifully
> rendered.
> Example of logos with this problem:
>
> old gnu hurd logo of just a generic sphere
> ( http://www.gnu.org/graphics/hurd-logo-sm.jpg )
>
> Fresco Window system of triangles ( http://fresco.org/ )
>
> cvs's fish. ( http://cvshome.org/
> http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/gki/cvssmaller.gif)
>
> bash of simplistic font (
> http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/bash/bashtop.html )
>
> python of simplistic font ( http://python.org/ )
>
> Better logos should be reminiscent to what it represents. Good
> example's are SGI's computer rendered tube cube illusion, Sun Micro's
> 8Us that spells out Sun in 4 directions, Apple's bitten apple, Be
> media company's eye-ear logo, NeXT's geometrical cube, X-Window's
> sharp X, Redhat's redhat, GNU's gnu head, BSD's deamon tyke, Microsoft
> Windows's window, Perl's ugly camel, nVidia's eye, GNU Hurd OS'
> recursive arrows, Shell's seashell, McDonnald's M, Taco Bell's bell,
> Honda's H, Yamaha's tuning forks ...
>
> Good logo should be distinct, an impression lock, even if it isn't
> reminiscent of what it represents. For example, AT&T's death star
> (globe connotation), Apache feather (Native American, panache),
> Linux's penguine tux (glut & sated), General Electric's curlicue font.
> Even
> font alone can do very good if in distinctive style: IBM stripped
> blue, Coke drink's cursives, ATI's high-tech font, ebay and google's
> and yahoo's colorful fonts.
>
> Note that the logo of popular corporations are not necessaily good.
> Examples
> are: SONY, JVC, TOSHIBA, RCA, Microsoft. These are just unremarkable.
>
> Good logo should not be overly complex. It shouldn't be photographic
> or complex drawings, in general.
>
> many of the above mentioned logos are collected here:
> http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/freebooks.html
> http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/usoft.html
> http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/lambda_logo.html
>
> -----------
>
> about the loban logo:
> Some logo don't have an idea behind it. Those do are usually better.
> The idea behind the lojban logo is great, but the quality, its artistic
> merits, is worse than nothing.
>
> There are really a lot of ways to arrive at a quality lojban logo. The
> gist of the problem really isn't about resources. It's about people —
> moron heads — in the aura of OpenSource milieu, because their grand
> vision who cannot see in the first place a shit thing is installed, and
> all the while wallow in the moronitude of “contribution”, “free”,
> “cooperation”, “goodness”, and with a fucking attitude and aggression
> about it too.
>
> PS This message is not directed at any individual, and i have not one
> person in the lojban community in which i hold grudge.
>
> Xah
> xah@xahlee.org
> ∑ http://xahlee.org/
>
>
> On Aug 13, 2005, at 6:48 AM, John E Clifford wrote:
>
> --- xah lee <xah@xahlee.org> wrote:
>
> > i just want to voice this again:
> >
> > the lojban logo is really truly hideous.
> >
> > it makes lojban like a fucking joke by the
> > OpenSource know-nothing
> > star-trekking tech-geeking morons.
> >
> > I find lojban a significant scientific pursuit.
> > But its logo, and now
> > with the joe-blog look of the official website,
> > really makes me ashamed
> > to associated with it.
> >
> > If the lojban org cannot have a professional
> > logo, please at least
> > don't use a juvenile one. It is better to have
> > no logo than that.
> >
> > Xah
> > xah@xahlee.org
>
> Gee, I kinda like it. What specifically is wrong
> with it and what would you recommend to improve
> it (aside from doing without a logo altogether)?
> It was the result of a contest (for which there
> were not a lot of entires, admittedly) which it
> won handily, so it seems to represent the best
> thought and wishes of the membership at a certain
> not to far past time. But it is now, so mayhap
> we need a new look for a new century (or some
> such sloganny line) -- though I confess that I
> see other things as being more pressing. (Would a
> detailed expalanaton of the logo's meaning help
> make it more appealing?)
>
>
>
> ☄
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
> with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
> you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.
>
>
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.