Well the logo recognition aspect of the arguments is a good one. I had not
thought about that aspect. I will also echo Bob and Wally's comments.
Please ignore my earlier points.
Dave Koester
Barrington, Illinois
dwkoester(a)earthlink.net
+++++++++++++++++++
OHGenWeb Project
County Coordinator:
Allen County, Ohio
Auglaize County, Ohio
Hancock County, Ohio
+++++++++++++++++++
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bremer,Robert" <bremerr(a)oclc.org>
To: <OHGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 2:29 PM
Subject: RE: [OHGW] Advisory Board Motion
Wally's comments below also sum up my view. The whole point of
having a
logo in terms of ready recognition and branding implies that there should
be only one logo for the national project, not multiple choices. If you
consider the logos on web pages of other national organizations or logos
appearing on their letterhead, they are essentially uniform unless the
organization is in transition from one official logo to another.
I think the current motion ought to be defeated. If there is interest in
changing the current logo, open up a contest for design submissions and
have people vote on their one choice as part of the regular board election
next July. I would think you would also need a run off between the two
top choices as well.
I'm not too keen on the flag design myself. I would rather see some kind
of symbolism that implies genealogy like blank pedigree imposed over the
U.S. map or something. While nicely done, in my opinion, the proposed
logo alternative minus the "USGenWeb Project" wording looks like it should
belong to a political action committee or an auxiliary unit of the Navy
rather than a genealogical project.
Robert Bremer
bremerr(a)oclc.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Wally [mailto:wally@calweb.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 1:22 PM
To: OHGEN-L(a)rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: [OHGW] Advisory Board Motion
Please vote NO on motion 04-23 for the reasons you state.
I also have qualms about having more than one logo for the Project at a
time so personally don't like the idea of "alternative" logos (temporary
ones for seasonal use, yes, but not permanent alternatives). I think
there
should be different sizes/transpancies/color schemes available, but only
ONE logo design for the whole project so project pages are instantly,
visually identifiable.
We had our logo election in Ohio and, while I preferred a different design
myself, the one we have now received the most votes and that is what we
must use on our sites to signify our being part of OHGenWeb. Alternative
designs do not say the same thing to browsers. Alternative designs would
encourage brand confusion. Browsers need to be instantly clear about
which
projects' pages they are viewing and that is accomplished when all
OHGenWeb
CCs use the same logo design on the pages for the project. Same should be
true for the national project.
At 12/7/04 09:53 AM, you wrote:
>This current motion is before the Advisory Board of the USGW -
>
>It has been moved by Darilee and seconded by Gail to approve the
>McGrew-Ayres "USA/flag" logos shown on
>http://www.mcgrewfamily.com/usgw.html as officially acceptable
>alternatives to the existing USGenWeb logo for all USGenWeb sites.
>
>The motion is numbered 04-23. Is there any discussion?
>**************************************
>This is what I have sent as my discussion:
>
>While I would probably be one of the first to change all my logos to the
>first one on the page that Julie designed, I cannot support the motion as
>written. I love Julie's designs and personally eager for a new logo. If
>it
>were to say an acceptable alternative until such time as others were able
>to
>submit designs, with irrevocable permission for the project to use them,
>and
>a vote was held by the members of the project to approve what they would
>like as a logo, then I could support it.
>
>I really think that the members of this project should be able to look at
>new designs, including the old logo, choose what they would like, by a
>project wide vote, and then move on from there.
>
>Just my humble opinion.
>***************************************
>Before making an official vote on this motion, I would like you know your
>opinion. Please let me know on how *you* think that I should vote.
>Regardless of my feelings, I will go with the majority of what *you*
>think.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jan Cortez
>NE/NC CC Rep
==== OHGEN Mailing List ====
OHGenWeb Project
http://www.Scioto.Org/OHGenWeb/index.html