David Abrahams wrote:
Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> writes:
Please send in your votes in this format:
1. 1st choice: Entry number (variant), Submitter 2. 2nd choice: Entry number (variant), Submitter 3. 3rd choice: Entry number (variant), Submitter 4. 4th choice: Entry number (variant), Submitter 5. 5th choice: Entry number (variant), Submitter
***where variant, designated by a letter, is optional.
Joel, how do you plan to deal with tallying votes for variants if the variant is optional? My top choices are variants of the same logo, IMO a clear standout over the others. I guess it's expected that I vote for both of those variants?
Boris Tursky, in a private email, sums it up: ''' multilevel voting could solve it, level 1 defines winning concept, level 2 defines the most liked variant of it, in terms of: "if you vote for this concept, which variant do you like most?". ''' I am not so keen on the second level as we seem to all agree that we should allow minor modifications to the winning logo. I am highly in favor of a post review which allows us to suggest tweaks and corections. I agree with Rob Stewart that we should officially allow post-selection alterations, following a consensus here in the boost list. For that matter, I decided to make the variant optional. I think its purpose is to help us decide which variant to focus our eyes on, post selection. I'm always open to suggestions and objections. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net