6 ms·

saying that the logo is just a small part of the overall identity is really dumb. saying that the general public is unqualified to comment on it is even dumber

saying that the logo is just a small part of the overall identity is really dumb. saying that the general public is unqualified to comment on it is even dumber. if 90% of people don't like it, it is by definition a bad logo.

colmvp 14y ago
"Saying that the logo is just a small part of the overall identity is really dumb." His point is that it makes no sense to evaluate a logo on it's own without greater context of how it fits with a fuller identity. "saying that the general public is unqualified to comment on it is even dumber." Why? Doing an identity is hard work and it requires more thought than just looking at a screen, evaluating it against something which it isn't even replacing, and then making a gut reaction. I wouldn't be surprised if most people went into the discussion with a bias introduction ("checkout this ugly logo!") without any rationale. "if 90% of people don't like it, it is by definition a bad logo." Well that depends on their taste.
- Turing_Machine 14y ago
  "Well that depends on their taste." Here is the problem: a logo is designed for the general public, not some elite audience of art critics. Their taste is THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS. It doesn't matter whether the designers like it. At all. If you want to do that kind of thing where only your esthetic opinion matters, you should be doing fine art, not web design.
taligent 14y ago
>if 90% of people don't like it, it is by definition a bad logo. Bzzt. WRONG. If 90% of "prospective 18-20 year olds" don't like it, then and only then is it a bad logo. Everyone else really should probably stay out of it since they aren't who the logo is for.
- Lewisham 14y ago
  You're kidding, right? It's just as important that the State, parents, alumni, research partners etc etc like it too. 18-20 year olds are probably one of the least important stakeholders at a research university.
- Turing_Machine 14y ago
  The UC campuses are research universities not teaching colleges per se (not that there's anything wrong with teaching colleges). 18-20 year olds don't bring a lot of grant money with them, as a rule.

colmvp 14y ago

"Saying that the logo is just a small part of the overall identity is really dumb." His point is that it makes no sense to evaluate a logo on it's own without greater context of how it fits with a fuller identity. "saying that the general public is unqualified to comment on it is even dumber." Why? Doing an identity is hard work and it requires more thought than just looking at a screen, evaluating it against something which it isn't even replacing, and then making a gut reaction. I wouldn't be surprised if most people went into the discussion with a bias introduction ("checkout this ugly logo!") without any rationale. "if 90% of people don't like it, it is by definition a bad logo." Well that depends on their taste.

Turing_Machine 14y ago
"Well that depends on their taste." Here is the problem: a logo is designed for the general public, not some elite audience of art critics. Their taste is THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS. It doesn't matter whether the designers like it. At all. If you want to do that kind of thing where only your esthetic opinion matters, you should be doing fine art, not web design.

taligent 14y ago

>if 90% of people don't like it, it is by definition a bad logo. Bzzt. WRONG. If 90% of "prospective 18-20 year olds" don't like it, then and only then is it a bad logo. Everyone else really should probably stay out of it since they aren't who the logo is for.

Lewisham 14y ago
You're kidding, right? It's just as important that the State, parents, alumni, research partners etc etc like it too. 18-20 year olds are probably one of the least important stakeholders at a research university.
Turing_Machine 14y ago
The UC campuses are research universities not teaching colleges per se (not that there's anything wrong with teaching colleges). 18-20 year olds don't bring a lot of grant money with them, as a rule.