On 20.09.2015 21:29, Aaron Wolf wrote: > > > On 09/20/2015 03:34 AM, mray wrote: >> On 19.09.2015 21:10, Aaron Wolf wrote: >>> >>>> @"we": >>>> "we" might be less inclusive than "together", but my point was that it >>>> addresses the human factor at all. (unlike "funding free culture"). >>>> "we" is almost as important as the financial and freedom parts of us. >>>> "together" overreaches in that aspect in my opinion. >>>> Let's face it: We are a closed club! We ask people to get on board, open >>>> up an account and trust their money with us. Our whole point is to >>>> persuade people to join the in-group. Not drawing a line makes that hard. >>>> "we" is also short. >>>> >>> >>> Although subtle, the ".coop" part of the name already includes the >>> community aspect. Aesthetically, I like "funding" better than "we fund", >>> and the "ing" part emphasizes the ongoing aspect of things. I don't feel >>> strongly here though. >> >> The reason I value the "we" so strongly is because we need to make clear >> that snowdrift is something to be part of. "funding" alone makes it >> remain unclear how the funding is done, but this is the *VERY* essence >> of our cause, it is "WE" who are funding this. not some snowdrift entity. >> along with "we fund" any appeal like "join us" makes so much more sense, >> it just fits way better. >> aesthetically i don't care about either form that much. >> "We fund" is more dynamic than "funding" I think, though. >> > > I'm not sure about the dynamicness of "we fund" over "funding". I really > like the "ing", however, I agree about the collective / join us issue. > > I wish it wasn't as long, but the feeling of togetherness is better > spelled out. Ignoring length, "Working together to fund the digital > commons" is the best way to completely get all the meaning. Another > would be "collective funding of the digital commons" or "social funding > for the digital commons" or "coming together to fund the digital > commons" or, how about: "join us in funding the digital commons!" or > shorter version of that, "fund the digital commons with us!" or, I like > this best of my little brainstorm here: "help us fund the digital > commons!" variations of that: "help fund the digital commons" or "let's > fund the digital commons" … > > I'm not opposed to "we" entirely, but I would like to get feedback from > others and see what others think of variations like I just posted. >
I don't like recruiting in the slogan. "join us...", "help us..." is a bit like begging right from the start. The slogan should not be about what we want people to do, but about what we do.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
