I’ll add my +1 for a new logo to coincide with 2.0. B.
> On 28 Oct 2014, at 17:22, Sinan Gabel <sinan.ga...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear All! > > I just want to say that I really like everything about CouchDB, the > database, the documentation and the logo. > > Best, > Sinan > > On 28 October 2014 17:38, Maria <ma...@dualpose.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 08:33:13 -0500 >> Bryan Green <dbryan.gr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I noticed you too seem to assume it is a man on the couch? Also, I >>> am glad that you point out that the logo does not have anything to do >>> with your use of CouchDB-- that encourages me to think that it will >>> not be as big of an issue to change it. >> >> When I first saw the logo I got the impression that it was showing >> Damien Katz relaxing :) >> >> // Maria >> >>> It may not offend you, but apparently it offends some people. This >>> is a bad thing for a logo. I think this is why it is rare for the >>> human figure to be common in most logos. Most keep logos very simple. >>> >>> Bryan >>> On Oct 28, 2014 8:24 AM, "Maria" <ma...@dualpose.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 12:52:23 +0100 >>>> Lena Reinhard <l...@thehoodiefirm.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Joan, thanks for sharing the experiences you had. I find it quite >>>>> interesting that it's been happening a few times even, and I'm >>>>> glad people shared their thoughts on it. >>>>> >>>>> First, as far as I perceive the topic, this is not just about the >>>>> question if people just "like" the logo or don't. It's about >>>>> people feeling offended by it. And thus, it would not be about >>>>> personal taste or preferences. (Side note, as we're talking about >>>>> "what does the logo remind us of?" – >>>>> http://savingroomforcats.tumblr.com/ ) >>>>> >>>>> Secondly, this is not necessarily about the intentions of the >>>>> logo. It may have been created depicting a person without an >>>>> explicit gender expression, and that would be completely alright. >>>>> But good intentions do generally not mean that the intention >>>>> aligns with the final perception. That's one of the basics of >>>>> human interaction and communication, and our logo is part of what >>>>> we communicate around this project. This logo is even a very >>>>> central part, as it can be recognised very well, it has a >>>>> prominient spot on most of CouchDB's web sites, and we even have >>>>> stickers with it. A consequence of this can (worst case) even be >>>>> that people stay away from the community because the logo >>>>> communicates to them that it's not a place for them. >>>>> >>>>> And as this obviously can be read as offensive by people, imo it's >>>>> our responsibility as a community to discuss this issue and how to >>>>> handle this – not based on the question whether we individually >>>>> "like" the logo or not, but on the question whether people could >>>>> find it offensive (which some obviously do) and how we handle >>>>> this – e.g. who could think of alternative versions of the logo, >>>>> and similar questions. We are a community which has recently put >>>>> up a Code of Conduct and Diversity statement, and as such, I see >>>>> caring about this topic as part of our responsibility here. >>>> >>>> Someone somewhere is offended because their dirty imagination sees a >>>> man on a couch inviting a girl over for some lewd action. >>>> So? >>>> There is always someone that is offended. Specially those that try >>>> very hard to be offended. >>>> >>>> <sarcasm> >>>> As a woman I pick databases based on the logo. The more girls with >>>> pink dresses and sparkling stars the better. Technical reasons like >>>> replication and solving conflicts have nothing to do with it. >>>> And I find a man relaxing on a couch so offensive that I will >>>> change the database I use. >>>> </sarcasm> >>>> >>>> // Maria >>>> >>>>> On 28 Oct 2014, at 11:58, Bryan Green <dbryan.gr...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> When the image lacks detail to signify it is not a man it will >>>>>> be thought to be male. IRL. >>>>>> On Oct 28, 2014 5:54 AM, "Benoit Chesneau" <bchesn...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Nick North >>>>>>> <nort...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't see anything offensive in the attitude of the man on >>>>>>>> the couch. >>>>>>> But >>>>>>>> I would be more sympathetic to the complaint that it is >>>>>>>> definitely a man, in a very male attitude, and that might be >>>>>>>> enough to put some women off becoming involved in the >>>>>>>> community. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> sure that is totally a man position: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.boijmans.nl/nl/116/nieuwsbrief/newsletteritem/421 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >> http://artobserved.com/2009/07/go-see-madrid-henri-matisse-at-museo-thyssen-bornemisza-through-september-20-2009/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Seriously, can people just go back IRL. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - benoit >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>
