On 09/18/2015 03:19 AM, mray wrote: > > > On 17.09.2015 18:55, Bryan Richter wrote: >> >> It's true: We *do* have a slogan, and arguments to change it must be >> heard. > > My argument is that brevity, concision, simplicity and clarity are > qualities to care about. I don't assume they guarantee a good slogan - > but I think they indicate effectiveness. I might miss other qualities, > but in my opinion colliding with those bears problems already. > > "clearing the path to a Free/Libre/Open world" > is quite long, clunky and hard to spontaneously recite (not brief) > > "clearing the path to a Free/Libre/Open world" > speaks in dilemma-themed metaphors (not concise) > > "clearing the path to a Free/Libre/Open world" > features a three-part word with two slashes and a non-english word (not > simple) > > "clearing the path to a Free/Libre/Open world" > omits the financial a angle (not clear) > > >> <snip> >> >> Regarding Robert's suggestion: putting aside the question of >> discarding our existing slogan, I would suggest one tweak. "We" does >> not, in fact, suggest to me that it is "about peaple (many!), maybe >> including [me]". It instead suggests an exclusive "we". I think the >> following has a more inclusive feel: "Funding free culture, together". >> > > I'm still convinced "we" works fine. > "We" can in fact be exclusive, too. But to some extend it is meant to > be; without an account on our service you're hardly part of what we do. > "We" reflects a good amount of needed tribe feeling. > We don't want people to just do things, but to become part of something. > A good example for the use of "together" instead of "we" might be: > "let's end racism, together", since you can just do that without > registering somewhere and transferring money. > > Also ", together" isn't that short and comes with the extra comma snag. > > > Robert > >
Robert, I basically agree with all your critiques of the current slogan, and the clunkiness of ", together" although it's still clear that "we" doesn't jump out as a welcome inclusiveness. In fact, I think it's weak enough that it's better to go with concise and eliminate "we" rather than have it. The main complaint I have about your proposals and suggestions is that you spend most of your time saying "these are the qualities we want" (which I agree with) and "this is how the current slogan falls short" (which I agree with), but you're not adequately addressing the *serious* flaws with the word "free" (which are still somewhat present in the phrase "free culture"). It generally feels like you say "the current slogan is not good, therefore this other one is good" without actually addressing the concerns about the new proposal. "Free" on its own is so bad for various reasons (jingoism and confusion about gratis) that I and others have been arguing that it is *worse* than the admittedly clunky and not great "free*libre*open". I don't think anyone disagrees with your critiques of the current slogan. The concern is about serious problems with the alternatives. A concise option: "Funding the free*libre*open commons" — despite the clunkiness, there's value in embracing a *consistent* term across all our messaging. And for removing clunkiness and getting more brief: "Funding the free and open commons" I don't love it but: "Funding the digital commons" is kinda ok. I really don't like the feel of the word "digital" though. -Aaron P.S.And while funding *is* the key feature, our vision is to have the best FLO commons and stop the amount of resources that get locked up in proprietary stuff. So, I happen to feel some sympathy toward not saying "funding" in the slogan because I'd rather we think of funding as a means to the end and focus on the end rather than the means, because it leaves us open to working on promoting FLO and volunteering alongside funding — but despite my sympathies in that way, I *do* buy the argument that focusing on funding makes more sense, so I'm okay with that. The term "free" is the one that has to be addressed because it is so bad in practice in reaching out to the general public. -- Aaron Wolf Snowdrift.coop <https://snowdrift.coop> _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
