I think we just need one more stage of logo submissions and then voting (voting can only happen after the submission deadline), then there is a voting deadline. But not voting while submission is still happening.
This time we have a constraint though. Take the top 3/4 performing logos, and then have people just work on ideas that follow those logos concepts. That way we end up with different ideas that stim off what the community is thinking in terms of logo concept. Once we do this again (probably will take another week for submissions and two-three days for voting). Then we can see what the results are and if there is a clear winner go with that. I don't like #5, but I'm sure there could be a variation of logo #5 that everyone would like. -- Thadeus On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:28 PM, weheh <richard_gor...@verizon.net> wrote: > 71 voters is probably close to a statistically significant sample of > the we2Wpy user base, however 17 percent of that number is most > certainly not. If you want something closer to a majority I would > suggest a runoff. It won't bruise my ego if my logo doesn't make it. I > know who I would vote for and it isn't #5. > On Oct 22, 12:02 pm, Jonathan Lundell <jlund...@pobox.com> wrote: > > On Oct 22, 2010, at 8:46 AM, mdipierro wrote: > > > > > > > > > I do not oppose a run-off if Bruno and Martin have the time to > > > continue with the project. > > > My guess is that the longer we drag this, the more people will lose > > > interest but I may be wrong. > > > > I'm not arguing with the choice; it's just an electoral digression. > > > > Something to consider, though, if the voting software is carried forward. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Massimo > > > > > On Oct 22, 10:06 am, Jonathan Lundell <jlund...@pobox.com> wrote: > > >> On Oct 22, 2010, at 7:07 AM, Anthony wrote: > > > > >>> On Oct 22, 9:50 am, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote: > > >>>> Thanks Bruno for your hard work. > > > > >>>> Although we have to choose one (and it seems to me we have a clear > > >>>> winner), I propose we keep some of the alternative ones (I > personally > > >>>> like 8, 14, 21, 41, 76, 87, 89, 12, 112) and we make them available > > >>>> under an Artistic License for web2py related community sites. > > > > >>> 104 is cool too, and it might be fun to use 37 somewhere as well. > > > > >> From the point of view of a voting guy (http://prfound.organdhttp:// > code.google.com/p/droop/), a quibble: the design with the most votes got > 12 of 71 votes, just under 17%. In a normal election, we might question > whether 17% of the vote yields a "clear winner". That's why Anthony and I > have been harping on the need for a more sophisticated voting method for > this kind of contest. > > > > >> My quick and unverified scan of the page turns up 69 votes, btw, not > 71. If that's right, there's a bug somewhere. Here's my list: > > > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 1 > > >> 2 > > >> 2 > > >> 2 > > >> 2 > > >> 2 > > >> 2 > > >> 4 > > >> 5 > > >> 5 > > >> 6 > > >> 7 > > >> 12 >
