[Noisebridge-discuss] [drama] New logo = terrorism?

[Jonathan Foote]

So where exactly is the consensus on this?

They may have had cool logos, but let's not forget the RAF and the
Weather Underground committed acts of violence against civilians.
The RAF killed 34 people in bombings and shootings. The WU was
clueless as well as well as violent, killing its own members with an
ineptly constructed nail bomb.

None of this constitutes excellence in my book.

How is the new logo not representative of -- or linked to -- violence
and ineptitude?




On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Jacob Appelbaum <jacob at appelbaum.net> wrote:
>> Underground logo.
>>=20
>> And frankly, while CCC are cool ppl and all, I don't see how that is a =
> =20
>> selling point. Especially not when the logo produced doesn't even look =
> =20
>> all that clean and nice.
>>=20
>> Was there something wrong with the old logo? Or did ppl just get =20
>> carried away after 26c3?
>
> The new logo doesn't _replace_ the old logo; it's a complementary logo.
> People should make new logos all the time! We don't need to idolize the
> old symbols forever. :-)
>
> The style of the logo is actually part of the statement. Clean and nice
> were not the design goal. The CCC star logo is clean and nice because
> that's both part of their aesthetic and the logo they played off of. The
> WU logo is totally a different aesthetic but just as our vision of
> society isn't theirs, this new logo isn't entirely related either.
>
> Best,
> Jake
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>