> No one > of the complainers and negativists do claim that they could do it much > better.
Indeed, I do not have to be able to write a particular program to notice it has bugs. On the other hand, (since I think the design, while not brilliant, is good) fixing the logo is something that can be achieved without too much fuss. > But I think at times it might be usefull to consult > professional aid. In the case of the logo design, I am not sure I agree. I think the twisted logo http://saph.twistedmatrix.com/blog/archives/twisted.png and the PyCon logo http://mirrors.ccs.neu.edu/Python/pub/old-www/pics/pycon-logo.gif were probably not designed by professional designers but rather by people who appreciate Python, and yet do have more appeal to the community and the outside world alike. If we are going to use a snake motif, we should use snakes that look like snakes. I suspect the current shy-tadpoles design was outsourced. (At one point NBC abandoned their very recognizable peacock for a totally vapid geometric design, for which they paid many thousands of dollars. (Including a huge settlement with a Nebraska TV station whose logo they had essentially copied) Eventually they reverted to a somewhat stylized peacock, which was a much better idea.) See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Broadcasting_Company_logos It's also interesting in passing to notice that another one of NBC's non-peacock logos was called the "snake", for reasons that will escape anyone who has not seen it animated. In any case, I will probably take a little more time to make the case that the shy tadpoles logo is a mistake. Finally, I disagree that the current logo is better than the neutral but consistently used php logo or the very clever java coffee mug logo, and notably the Ruby on Rails logo, which is first rate. mt -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
