On 10/30/07, James Rayner wrote:

Forwarding on some concerns over entries by developers in the logo competition.

I havn't made an official entry, but I have been taking ideas on some designs, with the intention of an official entry after development. http://src.iphitus.org/arch-logo/conceptAB.png http://src.iphitus.org/arch-logo/conceptC.png http://src.iphitus.org/arch-logo/conceptD.png

To quote: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=294343#p294343

" Finally, I have a more logistical concern about your potential submission. Rules have been laid out that devs will be the ones doing the initial vote on the logo, and the community only votes in the case of a tie. You submitting as a developer flags as an overt conflict of interest. Regardless of whether you vote or not on your design, you have no way to assure the community that nepotism won't come into play in the logo decision, if you submit. This will discourage others from submitting as they will all be starting at a SIGNIFICANT disadvantage as a decision maker will be creating a design of their own. If the developers wanted to create their own logo, they should not have ordained a community contest to have a logo created. I'm hoping all developers can appreciate this point of view. "

So two points: - Conflict of interest, easily solved - Favouritism.

Thoughts?

My thought? This is extreme (maybe even bullshit?) to me. Usually one resorts to nepotism when it pays off for both parties. Considering 1. you aren't getting paid 2. we aren't getting paid either, I don't see it playing that big of a factor. The community clearly wanted to get involved with this as they pretty much started it on their own. It is sad to think that a member of the dev team with ideas shouldn't even be allowed to submit them. I feel like we are a pretty honest group of guys here running this thing, and these type of comments actually bug me believe it or not. -Dan

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 22:47:43 +1100 (EST) "James Rayner" wrote:

Forwarding on some concerns over entries by developers in the logo competition.

I havn't made an official entry, but I have been taking ideas on some designs, with the intention of an official entry after development. http://src.iphitus.org/arch-logo/conceptAB.png http://src.iphitus.org/arch-logo/conceptC.png http://src.iphitus.org/arch-logo/conceptD.png

To quote: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=294343#p294343

" Finally, I have a more logistical concern about your potential submission. Rules have been laid out that devs will be the ones doing the initial vote on the logo, and the community only votes in the case of a tie. You submitting as a developer flags as an overt conflict of interest. Regardless of whether you vote or not on your design, you have no way to assure the community that nepotism won't come into play in the logo decision, if you submit. This will discourage others from submitting as they will all be starting at a SIGNIFICANT disadvantage as a decision maker will be creating a design of their own. If the developers wanted to create their own logo, they should not have ordained a community contest to have a logo created. I'm hoping all developers can appreciate this point of view. "

So two points: - Conflict of interest, easily solved - Favouritism.

Thoughts?

James

Favouritism? Bah, everybody knows we all hate you, James. :P (jk, of course) In all honesty, I think something like our official logo will important enough that devs will truthfully vote for those logos that they consider to be the best of the bunch, regardless of who submitted it - I know that's going to be my stance - heck, my WIFE was considering making an entry - that's got favouritism and conflict-of-interest written all over it, but if I honestly don't like her entry, I won't vote for it - the logo we're going to use is too important for that kind of silly stuff. However, we can talk about it until we're blue in the face, and if the community is still worried, then it's the community that needs to discuss the issue. Would changing from a private vote to a public vote alleviate these problems, or would that cause more issues than it solves? -- Travis

Tuesday 30 October 2007, James Rayner wrote: | So two points: |  - Conflict of interest, easily solved |  - Favouritism. to evade this, please make an official entry for any of your contributions. tihs discussion is closed. :) - D -- .·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´ ° ° ° ° ° ° ><((((º> ° ° ° ° ° <º)))>< <º)))><