Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora Is Looking For Your Feedback On A New Logo

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • seoking
    replied
    Originally posted by danmcgrew View Post
    @29 --

    I'm not going to quote you entirely; your response is too lengthy; excess verbiage is no substitute for a valid reason, or for valid reasoning.
    I'll just remark that you say a lot--you say most everything except why the logo needs to be changed.
    Have you read the number of comments, just on this forum, stating that the existing logo is preferred to any suggested change? Do these comments even make a difference, or is your mind already 'made up' that the logo must be changed?

    I will, as I'm certain we all will, ask you to defend the one pesky little problem which exists with your logic, to wit:

    "...When the logo we're using now was first introduced to replace the original one, there was a *ton* of opposition to it..."

    ...and yet you adopted it anyway, obviously for some VERY good reason(s). Please enlighten us as to the very good reasons why this existing logo, which was SO good as to be adopted in the face of "...a *ton* of opposition to it..." is now no longer worthy of being your standard bearer. You might also explain why all those "...representative messages..." (which you include in Comment #29 to refute my earlier comment about the simplistic beauty of the current logo) were NOT considered sufficient to suppress the adoption of the current logo, but now they are considered to be unquestionably sufficient and necessary for the adoption of a new logo.

    Your comment(s) are awaited. We all are in dire need of a lesson in valid logic; it is such a rare commodity these days.
    It's really a rare commodity these days!

    Leave a comment:


  • andrewpiana
    replied
    Originally posted by danmcgrew View Post
    @29 --

    I'm not going to quote you entirely; your response is too lengthy; excess verbiage is no substitute for a valid reason, or for valid reasoning.
    I'll just remark that you say a lot--you say most everything except why the logo needs to be changed.
    Have you read the number of comments, just on this forum, stating that the existing logo is preferred to any suggested change? Do these comments even make a difference, or is your mind already 'made up' that the logo must be changed?

    I will, as I'm certain we all will, ask you to defend the one pesky little problem which exists with your logic, to wit:

    "...When the logo we're using now was first introduced to replace the original one, there was a *ton* of opposition to it..."

    ...and yet you adopted it anyway, obviously for some VERY good reason(s). mybalancenow getmyoffer.capitalone mywmtotalrewards Please enlighten us as to the very good reasons why this existing logo, which was SO good as to be adopted in the face of "...a *ton* of opposition to it..."now no longer worthy of being your standard bearer. You might also explain why all those "...representative messages..." (which you include in Comment #29 to refute my earlier comment about the simplistic beauty of the current logo) were NOT considered sufficient to suppress the adoption of the current logo, but now they are considered to be unquestionably sufficient and necessary for the adoption of a new logo.

    Your comment(s) are awaited. We all are in dire need of a lesson in valid logic; it is such a rare commodity these days.
    Yes it is a rare commodity these days

    Leave a comment:


  • rossi123
    replied
    Originally posted by danmcgrew View Post
    @29 --

    I'm not going to quote you entirely; your response is too lengthy; excess verbiage is no substitute for a valid reason, or for valid reasoning.
    I'll just remark that you say a lot--you say most everything except why the logo needs to be changed.
    Have you read the number of comments, just on this forum, stating that the existing logo is preferred to any suggested change? Do these comments even make a difference, or is your mind already 'made up' that the logo must be changed?

    I will, as I'm certain we all will, ask you to defend the one pesky little problem which exists with your logic, to wit:

    "...When the logo we're using now was first introduced to replace the original one, there was a *ton* of opposition to it..."

    ...and yet you adopted it anyway, obviously for some VERY good reason(s). Please enlighten us as to the very good reasons why this existing logo, which was SO good as to be adopted in the face of "...a *ton* of opposition to it..."
    Bluestacks Kodi Lucky Patcheris now no longer worthy of being your standard bearer. You might also explain why all those "...representative messages..." (which you include in Comment #29 to refute my earlier comment about the simplistic beauty of the current logo) were NOT considered sufficient to suppress the adoption of the current logo, but now they are considered to be unquestionably sufficient and necessary for the adoption of a new logo.

    Your comment(s) are awaited. We all are in dire need of a lesson in valid logic; it is such a rare commodity these days.
    Yes it is a rare commodity these days

    Leave a comment:


  • lhutton
    replied
    About time! I've got a Fedora baseball cap from when the current logo first came out and stopped wearing it after I got a lot of "nice Facebook hat" from folks on the street. Their current logo does look too similar (even though I think the Fedora F/infinity logo pre-dates Facebook) and most people just associate it with Facebook.
    It would be nice to be able to wear some Fedora swag without getting it confused with that other thing that ruined in the Internet.

    Leave a comment:


  • mairin
    replied
    danmcgrew

    You're addressing what you classify "flaws" in my logic from my post here in the forums, not in my actual blog post. Here is the URL in case you need it; it's also linked from the OP here:

    https://blog.linuxgrrl.com/2019/01/0...do-you-prefer/

    Leave a comment:


  • torsionbar28
    replied
    Originally posted by DanL View Post
    And what do you think you did to this thread?
    My intent was to bring some levity to an otherwise dull and unproductive discussion. Your intent was to insult. Any feces with wings in this thread came from your man in the mirror.
    Last edited by torsionbar28; 20 January 2019, 03:01 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • danmcgrew
    replied
    @29 @47 @51 --

    Originally posted by mairin View Post
    Hi danmcgrew

    I already wrote a 5-6 page detailed blog post as to why the logo needs to change. Recommens you read it.
    How could I be so stupid as to not know that a five-to-six page blog post completely wipes out egregious errors in logic. Because you--and your superiors--obviously have a problem with reading comprehension, I have stated here--one more time--the very fatal errors in your logic.
    Two of its (the statement of your serious logic errors) beauties, quite aside from being irrefutable logic, is that it does NOT consume five to six pages, and it is understandable by anyone with common sense; someone who has never had a course in formal logic.
    ************************************************** ***************
    "
    I will, as I'm certain we all will, ask you to defend the one pesky little problem which exists with your logic, to wit:

    "...When the logo we're using now was first introduced to replace the original one, there was a *ton* of opposition to it..."

    ...and yet you adopted it anyway, obviously for some VERY good reason(s). Please enlighten us as to the very good reasons why this existing logo, which was SO good as to be adopted in the face of "...a *ton* of opposition to it..." is now no longer worthy of being your standard bearer. You might also explain why all those "...representative messages..." (which you include in Comment #29 to refute my earlier comment about the simplistic beauty of the current logo) were NOT considered sufficient to suppress the adoption of the current logo, but now they are considered to be unquestionably sufficient and necessary for the adoption of a new logo.

    Your comment(s)--addressing this serious error in your logic processes--are anxiously awaited. We all are in dire need of a lesson in valid logic; it is such a rare commodity these days."

    Leave a comment:


  • ssokolow
    replied
    Reminds me of how MasterCard changed their iconic logo to a boring Venn Diagram that any idiot could have come up with.

    Leave a comment:


  • mairin
    replied
    Hi danmcgrew

    I already wrote a 5-6 page detailed blog post as to why the logo needs to change. Recommens you read it.

    Leave a comment:


  • danmcgrew
    replied
    Originally posted by rukur View Post
    Marketing need a reason to exist. Is all I can think of.

    While the 10 oldest logos are dated. Most could be put into Scalable Vector Formats and be fine.

    http://time.com/2904290/10-oldest-company-logos/
    Absolutely beautiful, rukur; you have gotten to the heart of the matter, the undeniable truth, and--believe me--the reason and the only reason. Take it from someone who was in the corporate world for many years and who saw this kind of horsesh*t go on time after time.

    Why else do you think we haven't heard back from Fedora?

    If you always remember this one simple truth, "Most people don't have any real work to do", this will go a long way towards explaining garbage like this. Good man.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X