Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi Joey,

Sorry to disappoint after all your work but I took a poll at work and it was
unianimous... people liked the original logo better.  They thought it was
easier to read (f's are too close) and they thought the f connecting to the
i was out of place with the rest of the logo.

Vote: Original


On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Johannes Bausch


okay, I've tried to set up a voting page for us, see here:

<>Do you all have
write access to this page? I am not that experienced with wikis.

@Bernhard: I've shifted the i more to the left. I've also redone the visual
kerning for some of the letters; have a look at the scaled-down versions,
"should" look more even now.

@all: It would be great if you voted on the wiki or here on the mailing
list. Even if you disapprove of this poll it would be great to get some
opinions on this; so far it's only five people who talk about it.


PS: I'll be away until Wednesday next week.

2011/3/2 Bernhard Dippold <>

Hi Joey, all,

replying to both of your mails, so please scroll down until the end...

Johannes Bausch schrieb:


to gather some more opinions I thought it would be a good idea to have a
poll somewhere else, so I asked people in a forum to cast their vote.
Although I don't know whether this was a good idea (not really
representative, game design forum, so people might be programmers) I
you might be interested in the results:

It's impossible to see the different alternatives, because at my computer
the background is nearly black.

Ii updated the image with a slightly lighter grey background, so you can
see the different alternatives, but keep the white text of the poll

 Apparently noone likes the
too fancy ligatures. Most people also complained about the logo in
so I tried to explain why this is (and remains, for now) the logo of
If you're interested in the comments, too, I'll send you the link.
So... in the next days I'll make some final drafts and put up a voting
If you have some final ideas please tell me.

People seem to like the last alternative (with "f" bow bent towards the
dot) as much as the original.

Even if this is far from being representative, I'd like to see a
version of this proposal.

Could you improve this by moving the "i" nearer to the "f"? I don't think
that equal spacing for the dot between "f" and "i" looks best...

Perhaps a combination of your third an my proposal?


2011/3/2 Johannes Bausch<>

 Hey Bernhard,

2011/3/2 Bernhard Dippold<>

In your reply to my last mail I understood you in a way that you wanted

work on a new proposal.

 I added a third alternative (which I don't like very much). The logos
on my
page are only drafts; if we decide on one of them, I'll spend more time
it. At the moment I don't have another idea how to deal with the
do you? I'd be more than glad to try another one.

Like your poll members I like this proposal best, but it needs some more
tweaking (I mentioned above).

I don't think that there are so many alternatives to modify the two "f"
the "i", so I don't have any other reliable alternative in mind.


But what we need to keep in mind: Changes being recognized by the

user / viewer will more likely be postponed until a new major or minor
than modifications leading "only" to a more balanced, professional and
consistent visual impression.

 +1, I agree.

In my eyes proposals (c) and (d) might fall in the "balanced" category,
while (a) and (b) would be more recognizable as modified details.

 Who has the final word on that?

The SC, but they probably support a decision by the Design Team.

Best regards


Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.