[OSM-talk] New Logo in the Wiki

Sun May 1 03:31:13 BST 2011

David, this is complete nonsense. Please stop.
-Mikel

________________________________
From: David Murn <davey at incanberra.com.au>
To: SteveC <steve at asklater.com>
Cc: "talk at openstreetmap.org" <talk at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Sat, April 30, 2011 6:15:08 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] New Logo in the Wiki

On Sat, 2011-04-30 at 09:03 -0700, SteveC wrote:
> You will also find discussion of this list in that meeting. If I had
> posted the new logo idea here before doing anything there would have
> been a gigantic discussion on it and nothing would happen.

What a load of bollocks.  Has the OSMF ever changed its direction or
strategy after feedback from this list?  The various committees do what
they please when they please, that wont change.  It appears that the
announcement here HAS caused a gigantic discussion, and while a small
part has been about the logo change, a big part of the discussion is the
way that we as a community are treated.  If SWG and OSMF feel they have
the power to do what they want without consulting the community, then
those handful of mappers should be the ones mapping and not be using the
efforts of the community they refuse to consult with.  Maybe SWG needs
to comprehend what the O in OSM means, it doesnt mean you make major
decisions behind closed doors, document them with a 3 word note in the
minutes and refuse to discuss with the community because it might cause
a big discussion, even aware that once the community becomes aware of
their change, a big discussion will ensue anyway.

> Any progress at all in any direction now means at least 5 or 10 people
> on this list don't like it.

So, the OSM executive committee (which as some people like to keep
pointing out is a registered non-profit in some countries) doesnt like
seeking input from the community (of apparently 200k+ people) because
5-10 might dislike their idea?  Seriously, where did we find this
handful of people who cant handle a couple of people disliking their
ideas?  Apparently watching this discussion.

>From what Ive seen in the ensuing discussion, the feedback to the logo
itself was mostly positive, the displeasure has been with the process
used to change things.  Sadly this is pretty much on-par with what we're
starting to expect from those in power lately.

>  That makes it very hard for anyone to achieve anything without
>  treating this list as noise. We need to get away from that. Any ideas
>  appreciated.

My idea is that OSMF should treat the OSM community as the public they
serve, rather than a bunch of noise.  Exactly how strong does OSMF think
the project and data would be, if everyone who had an opinion (who wasnt
a financial member of some overseas non-profit) was banned?

David

> On Apr 30, 2011, at 7:23, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > 2011/4/30 Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com>:
> >> From: Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch>
> >>> While I don't quite understand why the SWG has turned in to the WDWG (Web
> >>> Design Working Group)
> >> SWG has taken this on because the usability of the site is a the primary 
way
> >> users, new and old, engage with OSM, there are definitely issues with it.
> > 
> > 
> > the logo is not an usability topic.
> > 
> > 
> >> Yet, in yesterday's meeting, we realized that actually doing anything would
> >> be a good start.
> > 
> > 
> > Yes, looking at the working group log, I realized that. Looks like
> > Steve posted this proposal [1] he found in the web (or someone sent
> > him), and one day later some logos are changed on the front page (some
> > still are old versions).
> > 
> > There is two quotes I want to cite from the log:
> > 
> > 1.
> > (12:38:15 PM) SteveC: TomH: how is rails 3 coming BTW?
> > (12:39:02 PM) TomH: oh it mostly works, but there's an issue with our
> > multi-part primary keys that is giving me grief
> > (12:39:11 PM) TomH: that's the only thing causing test failures now though
> > 
> > 2.
> > "(12:42:31 PM) SteveC: wonderchook: and I have opinions on Fukushima
> > despite not being a nuclear engineer, but it's much better to have
> > people work on design who... know how to design and build things"
> > 
> > It's not that I necessarily prefer the old logo above the one that is
> > there at the moment, it is the process I want to point at. Why, if
> > there are apparently no designers in the SWG, should there be such a
> > hurry (and why should they decide at all, maybe setting up a design
> > group would be a better alternative)? The logo change is a big deal,
> > it affects hundreds of sites (also of other people using OSM data and
> > show the logo), stickers, t-shirts, cups, flyers and other print
> > material and maps(!)...
> > 
> > Usually changing the logo is not a oneliner, it is an iterative
> > process. Make some proposals, choose the aspects you like, recombine
> > them, ...
> > 
> > Like software deployment requires testing (see irc-log above, 1.) the
> > same is valid (in a different way) also for design (2.) and even more
> > for UI-design. Usually the first experiments are not done on the front
> > page.
> > 
> > cheers,
> > Martin
> > ______
> > 
> > [1] (12:35:35 PM) SteveC: Go look at this logo:
> > 
>http://raraken.deviantart.com/art/OpenStreetMap-Icon-Logo-174454488?q=gallery:Raraken/6244368&qo=8
>
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > talk at openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20110430/4694c686/attachment-0001.html>