[Lnc-business] UPDATED - logo picker

[Joshua Katz]

Aaron's design was included in the straw poll and was voted to remain in
consideration. It's true it was a concept, but all designs were being
considered conceptually.
On Apr 18, 2015 12:42 PM, "Brett Bittner" <brett at brettbittner.com> wrote:

> Why are we adding designs outside the work of the committee and the
> designs included straw poll in Phoenix? Why does this designer get special
> treatment?
>
>
>
> Brett C. Bittner
>
> brett at brettbittner.com
> 404.492.6524
>
> "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much
> liberty than those attending too small a degree of it." -- Thomas Jefferson
>
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Daniel Wiener <wiener at alum.mit.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> Aaron Starr spoke with the designer today, who seems very interested in
>> coming up with a logo for the LP based on his Lady Liberty/Rosie the
>> Riveter theme.  He will probably have a concept available prior to the May
>> 3rd meeting.
>>
>> Dan Wiener
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:12 AM, Daniel Wiener <wiener at alum.mit.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you, Arvin.  Now that I can see the logo candidates side-by-side,
>>> here are my impressions:
>>>
>>> 1. "Torch Eagle" -- Not bad, and I could live with it.  But I'm not as
>>> enthusiastic as I was at the LNC meeting.
>>>
>>> 2. "Torch Flower" -- Meh.  I could tolerated it, just barely.  There are
>>> several better options.
>>>
>>> 3. "Liberty Bell L" -- No.  I'm not a fan of negative space, and if
>>> someone doesn't immediately recognize the bell portion it looks pretty
>>> stupid.
>>>
>>> 4. "1996 (prior) Logo" -- This would be my default choice if we can't
>>> agree on anything else.
>>>
>>> 5. "L-Looping-P" -- I can't make up my mind about this.  On the one hand
>>> I appreciate its clean form and simplicity, and the way it could lend
>>> itself to good branding.  On the other hand, it seems like it would only be
>>> effective if we spent $100 million on a marketing campaign to establish it
>>> as the LP symbol, similar to what giant corporations would have to do to
>>> re-brand themselves.  Plus it lacks any inherent meaning, which may not
>>> bother the general public but would matter to a lot of libertarians.
>>>
>>> 6. "Crown-in-Torch" -- I like it.  It has a touch of elegance and
>>> maintains the LP's torch of liberty theme.  I wouldn't necessarily put it
>>> in first place, but I'd classify it as one of the leading contenders.
>>>
>>> 7. "Stylized Lady Liberty" -- It's okay, but I think it's a bit inferior
>>> to #4.
>>>
>>> 8. "Old Logo" -- Too dark.  Not as good as #4.
>>>
>>> 9. "Rosie the Riveter" -- This has possibilities.  But this was a
>>> conceptual suggestion, and needs to be simplified and stylized a bit to
>>> make it more practical.  Aaron Starr had proposed this, and said he was
>>> going to follow up with the Texas LP and contact the designer to see if an
>>> improved version could be made.  I'm copying Aaron on this email, to see if
>>> he's made any progress along those lines.
>>>
>>> Dan Wiener
>>>
>>> --------------------
>>> From: Arvin Vohra <arvin at arvinvohra.com>
>>> Date: Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 11:33 PM
>>> Subject: [Lnc-business] UPDATED - logo picker
>>> To: lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi guys - here is an updated image showing the logo options.
>>>
>>> -Arvin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *"In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we
>>> guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s the truth. Then we
>>> compute the consequences of the guess, to see what, if this is right, if
>>> this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply and then we compare
>>> the computation results to nature or we say compare to experiment or
>>> experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works. If it
>>> disagrees with experiment, it’s WRONG. In that simple statement is the key
>>> to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it
>>> doesn’t matter how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is.
>>> If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”*
>>> -- Richard Feynman (https://tinyurl.com/lozjjps)
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *"In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we
>> guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s the truth. Then we
>> compute the consequences of the guess, to see what, if this is right, if
>> this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply and then we compare
>> the computation results to nature or we say compare to experiment or
>> experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works. If it
>> disagrees with experiment, it’s WRONG. In that simple statement is the key
>> to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it
>> doesn’t matter how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is.
>> If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”*
>> -- Richard Feynman (https://tinyurl.com/lozjjps)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20150418/60c874fb/attachment-0002.html>