I don't really see how my mail was against the code of conduct. He simply said that he thinks it looks like a logo. I replied that I find that silly, since it doesn't make any attempt to resemble the Windows logo and is, in fact, something completely different. I didn't think I'd need to elaborate on that too much. My reply was simply to reject the criticism he gave, as I don't recognize it as valid.
I'm sorry if it sounded a little condescending, though, since I really didn't mean to come off like that. To validate my previous mail a bit: I don't think that it should remind most people of the Windows logo. It's a cross that visually divides different parts of the image alright, but it isn't anything more than that. I feel that the composition the wallpaper has now is good, and that any changes to it should be directed to other aspects of the design. Michiel Op 26-sep-2006, om 11:51 heeft Mark Shuttleworth het volgende geschreven: > Michiel Sikma wrote: >> That is total nonsense. It's a very good wallpaper, and I don't >> think that the balance its composition currently holds should be >> compromised because a design element vaguely reminds you of a >> logo. That's just silly. > Michiel, please observe the code of conduct in responding to a user > comment. > > Mark > -- ubuntu-art mailing list ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
