Logo Contest: Send In Your votes!
Hi Y'all, Acceptance of logo entries is officially over. I waited more than 24 hours after the March 1 deadline to account for the time zones. For my convenience, I find it best to simply collect the votes by email. For this purpose, I setup a mail account at address: boost.logo.contest@gmail.com where you can send your votes to. For transparency, I shared the password with the Boost Moderators, so they can check the status anytime. Please be reminded that voting shall be based on Instant Runoff Voting (http://www.fairvote.org/irv/whatis2.htm), meaning that each individual voter shall choose 5 favorites, in order of preference. 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. Example: 1. 225, John Doe 2. 336a, Jane Doe 3. 751, Apple Pie 4. 101b, Dorothy Rainbow 5. 855, Kim Possible I shall be collecting votes and progressively posting the results in the boost web site. The competition will close on March 15, 2005 and the winning entry will be announced soon thereafter. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> writes:
Hi Y'all,
Acceptance of logo entries is officially over. I waited more than 24 hours after the March 1 deadline to account for the time zones.
<snip> And the logo contest page where you can see the submissions is... http://www.boost.org/more/logo_contest.htm -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote:
And the logo contest page where you can see the submissions is...
Thanks Dave! -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 10:53:39 -0500, David Abrahams wrote
Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> writes:
Hi Y'all,
Acceptance of logo entries is officially over. I waited more than 24 hours after the March 1 deadline to account for the time zones.
<snip>
And the logo contest page where you can see the submissions is...
All I can say is wow! I hadn't looked at these for awhile -- thanks to all the submitters for making the choices very hard! Ok, now for one question. I like a couple of them that say something like 'C++ Library'. Really Boost isn't a single library and so it's really hard to vote for these. If they just said 'Libraries' they would be fine -- can I presume we might be able to request some small tweaks in the final product? Jeff
Jeff Garland wrote:
On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 10:53:39 -0500, David Abrahams wrote
Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> writes:
Hi Y'all,
Acceptance of logo entries is officially over. I waited more than 24 hours after the March 1 deadline to account for the time zones.
<snip>
And the logo contest page where you can see the submissions is...
All I can say is wow! I hadn't looked at these for awhile -- thanks to all the submitters for making the choices very hard!
Ok, now for one question. I like a couple of them that say something like 'C++ Library'. Really Boost isn't a single library and so it's really hard to vote for these. If they just said 'Libraries' they would be fine -- can I presume we might be able to request some small tweaks in the final product?
I don't see any reason why not. Cheers, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
From: "Jeff Garland" <jeff@crystalclearsoftware.com>
Ok, now for one question. I like a couple of them that say something like 'C++ Library'. Really Boost isn't a single library and so it's really hard to vote for these. If they just said 'Libraries' they would be fine -- can I presume we might be able to request some small tweaks in the final product?
This arrived shortly after I sent a similar query. Great minds think alike! -- Rob Stewart stewart@sig.com Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;
Rob Stewart wrote:
From: "Jeff Garland" <jeff@crystalclearsoftware.com>
Ok, now for one question. I like a couple of them that say something like 'C++ Library'. Really Boost isn't a single library and so it's really hard to vote for these. If they just said 'Libraries' they would be fine -- can I presume we might be able to request some small tweaks in the final product?
This arrived shortly after I sent a similar query. Great minds think alike!
I am in favor of post-selection alterations. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
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? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
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
Joel de Guzman wrote:
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.
I agree with this. Jonathan
One thing not mentioned in the voting procedures is whether we can make any changes to the selected logo. IOW, I voted for several logos that weren't quite the way I'd want them in their final form, but they were compelling for various reasons. If others felt they could vote for a logo with the hope that it will be slightly different in its final form, it might change how some vote. Consider 67b, for instance. I don't like the color scheme, yet the abstract blocks/checkerboard is visually unique and can be used alone as an icon (even alongside the URL in the brower's address bar). Thus, I propose that we officially allow, or disallow as the case may be, such post-selection alterations, with the approval of the membership. That is, if we permit modifications, then once we have selected a logo based upon the current voting, we open discussions on any *minor* alterations, produce the alternate forms of the logo, and have a final vote on that. Under the category of minor alterations, I would include: - colors - relative sizing of elements - relative spacing of elements - phrasing ("Boost Libraries" instead of "Boost Library" for example) -- Rob Stewart stewart@sig.com Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;
Rob Stewart <stewart@sig.com> writes:
One thing not mentioned in the voting procedures is whether we can make any changes to the selected logo. IOW, I voted for several logos that weren't quite the way I'd want them in their final form, but they were compelling for various reasons. If others felt they could vote for a logo with the hope that it will be slightly different in its final form, it might change how some vote.
Consider 67b, for instance. I don't like the color scheme, yet the abstract blocks/checkerboard is visually unique and can be used alone as an icon (even alongside the URL in the brower's address bar).
Thus, I propose that we officially allow, or disallow as the case may be, such post-selection alterations, with the approval of the membership. That is, if we permit modifications, then once we have selected a logo based upon the current voting, we open discussions on any *minor* alterations, produce the alternate forms of the logo, and have a final vote on that.
Under the category of minor alterations, I would include:
- colors - relative sizing of elements - relative spacing of elements - phrasing ("Boost Libraries" instead of "Boost Library" for example)
I Agree. I voted with similar attached considerations. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Hi, I have to apologize to Mike Mangone. For some reason, I missed his submission dated Feb 16. For those who voted already, please check out his entry (no. 99). If you find his entry compelling, I am willing to make corrections to my tally if any of you wish to resend your votes. Again, pardon me for this slip. http://boost.org/more/logo_contest.htm Send your votes to: boost.logo.contest@gmail.com Kind Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
participants (5)
-
David Abrahams -
Jeff Garland -
Joel de Guzman -
Jonathan Turkanis -
Rob Stewart